HomeMy WebLinkAboutPA2024-0069_2025.05.23_Draft EIR_Appendix J. GHG Analysis
Surf Farm
GREENHOUSE GAS ANALYSIS
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PREPARED BY:
Haseeb Qureshi
hqureshi@urbanxroads.com
Alyssa Barnett
abarnett@urbanxroads.com
APRIL 2, 2025
16241-10 GHG Report
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................... I
APPENDICES II
LIST OF EXHIBITS ................................................................................................................................ II
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................................. II
LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS ............................................................................................................ III
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... 1
ES.1 Summary of Findings ..................................................................................................................... 1
ES.2 Project Requirements ................................................................................................................... 1
1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Site Location .................................................................................................................................. 4
1.2 Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 4
2 CLIMATE CHANGE SETTING ........................................................................................................ 8
2.1 Introduction to Global Climate Change (GCC) .............................................................................. 8
2.2 Global Climate Change Defined .................................................................................................... 8
2.3 GHGs ............................................................................................................................................. 8
2.4 Global Warming Potential (GWP) ............................................................................................... 15
2.5 GHG Emissions Inventories ......................................................................................................... 15
2.6 Effects of Climate Change in California ....................................................................................... 16
2.7 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................................................................... 18
3 EXISTING PROJECT SITE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ............................................................. 41
4 PROJECT GHG IMPACT ............................................................................................................. 43
4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 43
4.2 Standards of Significance ............................................................................................................ 43
4.3 Models Employed To Analyze GHGs ........................................................................................... 45
4.4 Life-Cycle Analysis Not Required ................................................................................................ 45
4.5 Construction Emissions ............................................................................................................... 45
4.6 Operational Emissions ................................................................................................................ 48
4.7 GHG Emissions Findings and Recommendations ........................................................................ 50
4 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 53
5 CERTIFICATIONS ...................................................................................................................... 57
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
ii
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 3.1: CALEEMOD EXISTING EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
APPENDIX 4.1: CALEEMOD PROJECT EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
LIST OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT 1-A: LOCATION MAP ............................................................................................................. 5
EXHIBIT 1-B: SITE PLAN ...................................................................................................................... 6
EXHIBIT 2-A: SUMMARY OF PROJECTED GLOBAL WARMING IMPACT, 2070-2099 (AS COMPARED WITH
1961-1990) ................................................................................................................. 14
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE ES-1: SUMMARY OF CEQA SIGNIFICANCE FINDINGS ................................................................. 1
TABLE 2-1: GHGS ................................................................................................................................ 9
TABLE 2-2: GWP AND ATMOSPHERIC LIFETIME OF SELECT GHGS ....................................................... 15
TABLE 2-3: TOP GHG PRODUCING COUNTRIES AND THE EUROPEAN UNION ...................................... 16
TABLE 3-1: GHG EMISSIONS FROM EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ............................................................ 41
TABLE 4-1: CONSTRUCTION DURATION ............................................................................................. 46
TABLE 4-2: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ASSUMPTIONS (1 OF 2) ...................................................... 46
TABLE 4-2: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ASSUMPTIONS (2 OF 2) ...................................................... 47
TABLE 4-3: AMORTIZED ANNUAL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS ........................................................... 47
TABLE 4-4: PROJECT GHG EMISSIONS (WITHOUT MITIGATION) ......................................................... 50
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
iii
LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS
% Percent
°C Degrees Celsius
°F Degrees Fahrenheit
(1) Reference
2017 Scoping Plan Final 2017 Scoping Plan Update
AB Assembly Bill
AB 32 Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006
AB 1493 Pavley Fuel Efficiency Standards
AB 1881 California Water Conservation Landscaping Act of 2006
Annex I Industrialized Nations
AQIA Surf Farm Air Quality Impact Analysis
BAU Business as Usual
C2F6 Hexafluoroethane
C2H6 Ethane
C2H2F4 Tetrafluroethane
C2H4F2 Ethylidene Fluoride
CAA Federal Clean Air Act
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
CALGAPS California LBNL GHG Analysis of Policies Spreadsheet
CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officers Association
CARB California Air Resource Board
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFA California Department of Food and Agriculture
CEC California Energy Commission
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA Guidelines CEQA Statute and Guidelines
CF4 Tetrafluoromethane
CFC Chlorofluorocarbons
CFC-113 Trichlorotrifluoroethane
CH4 Methane
City City of Newport Beach
CNRA California Natural Resources Agency
CNRA 2009 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
iv
CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
Convention United Nation’s Framework Convention on Climate Change
COP Conference of the Parties
CPUC California Public Utilities Commission
DWR Department of Water Resources
EMFAC Emission Factor Model
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EV Electric Vehicle
GCC Global Climate Change
Gg Gigagram
GHGA Greenhouse Gas Analysis
gpd Gallons Per Day
gpm Gallons Per Minute
GWP Global Warming Potential
H2O Water
HFC Hydrofluorocarbons
HDT Heavy-Duty Trucks
HFC-23 Fluoroform
HFC-134a 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane
HFC-152a 1,1-difluoroethane
HHDT Heavy-Heavy-Duty Trucks
hp Horsepower
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
ISO Independent System Operator
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
kWh Kilowatt Hours
lbs Pounds
LBNL Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
LCA Life-Cycle Analysis
LCD Liquid Crystal Display
LCFS Low Carbon Fuel Standard or Executive Order S-01-07
LEV III Low-Emission Vehicle
LULUCF Land-Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry
MDV Medium-Duty Vehicles
MHDT Medium-Heavy-Duty Tucks
MMTCO2e Million Metric Ton of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
mpg Miles Per Gallon
MPOs Metropolitan Planning Organizations
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
v
MMTCO2e/yr Million Metric Ton of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent Per Year
MT/yr Metric Tons Per Year
MTCO2e Metric Ton of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
MTCO2e/yr Metric Ton of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent Per Year
MW Megawatts
MWh Megawatts Per Hour
MWELO California Department of Water Resources’ Model Water
Efficient
N2O Nitrous Oxide
NDC Nationally Determined Contributions
NF3 Nitrogen Trifluoride
NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
NOX Nitrogen Oxides
Non-Annex I Developing Nations
OAL Office of Administrative Law
OPR Office of Planning and Research
PFC Perfluorocarbons
ppb Parts Per Billion
ppm Parts Per Million
ppt Parts Per Trillion
Project Surf Farm
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
SAFE Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Rule
SB Senate Bill
SB 32 California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006
SB 375 Regional GHG Emissions Reduction Targets/Sustainable
Communities Strategies
SB 1078 Renewable Portfolio Standards
SB 1368 Statewide Retail Provider Emissions Performance
Standards
SCAB South Coast Air Basin
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
Scoping Plan California Air Resources Board Climate Change Scoping Plan
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
sf Square Feet
SF6 Sulfur Hexaflouride
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
vi
SLPS Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Strategy
SP Service Population
TDM Transportation Demand Measures
Title 20 Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards
Title 24 California Building Code
U.N. United Nations
U.S. United States
UNFCCC United Nations’ Framework Convention on Climate Change
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
WCI Western Climate Initiative
WRI World Resources Institute
ZE/NZE Zero and Near-Zero Emissions
ZEV Zero-Emissions Vehicles
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
vii
This page intentionally left blank
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The results of this Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis (GHGA) are summarized below based on
the significance criteria in Section 3 of this report consistent with Appendix G of the Guidelines
for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines) (1). Table ES-
1 shows the findings of significance for potential greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
TABLE ES-1: SUMMARY OF CEQA SIGNIFICANCE FINDINGS
Analysis Report
Section
Significance Findings
Unmitigated Mitigated
GHG Impact #1: Would the Project generate
GHG emissions either directly or indirectly,
that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
4.7 Less Than Significant n/a
GHG Impact #2: Would the Project conflict
with an applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of GHGs?
4.7 Less Than Significant n/a
ES.2 PROJECT REQUIREMENTS
The Project would be required to comply with regulations imposed by the State of California, the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), and the City of Newport Beach aimed
at the reduction of air pollutant emissions. Those that are directly and indirectly applicable to the
Project and that would assist in the reduction of GHG emissions include:
• Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill [AB] 32) (2).
• Regional GHG Emissions Reduction Targets/Sustainable Communities Strategies (Senate Bill [SB]
375) (3).
• Pavley Fuel Efficiency Standards (AB 1493). Establishes fuel efficiency ratings for new vehicles (4).
• California Building Code (Title 24 California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Establishes energy
efficiency requirements for new construction (5).
• Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 20 CCR). Establishes energy efficiency requirements
for appliances (6).
• Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS). Requires carbon content of fuel sold in California to be 10
percent (%) less by 2020 (7).
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
2
• Statewide Retail Provider Emissions Performance Standards (SB 1368). Requires energy
generators to achieve performance standards for GHG emissions (8).
• Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS). Requires electric corporations to increase the amount of
energy obtained from eligible renewable energy resources to 20% by 2010 and 33% by 2020. SB
350 mandated a 50% RPS by 2030. SB 100 increased the RPS requirements to 60% by 2030 with
new interim targets of 44% by 2024 and 52% by 2027 (9).
• California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (SB 32). Requires the state to reduce statewide
GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030, a reduction target that was first introduced in
Executive Order B-30-15 (10).
Promulgated regulations that would affect the Project’s emissions are accounted for in the
Project’s GHG calculations provided in this report. In particular, AB 1493, LCFS, and RPS are
accounted for in the Project’s emission calculations.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
3
This page intentionally left blank
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
4
1 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the GHGA prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., for the
proposed Surf Farm Project (Project). The purpose of this GHGA is to evaluate Project-related
construction and operational emissions and determine the level of GHG impacts as a result of
constructing and operating the Project.
1.1 SITE LOCATION
The Project is a 15-acre site located at 3100 Irvine Avenue in Newport Beach, as shown in Exhibit
1-A. To the west and south of the site are residential uses, to the east are commercial uses, and
to the north is the Newport Beach Golf Course.
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project would develop a 5-acre lagoon, a 50,341 square foot (SF) three-story clubhouse with
18,137 SF of basement storage and restroom, a 9,432 SF athlete accommodation building with
1,624 SF of ancillary restroom and storage space, 351 parking stalls, and 3 pools, totaling a gross
floor area of 79,534 SF.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
5
EXHIBIT 1-A: LOCATION MAP
J' ~ I
C ' I
0
~' ¾,..,. ··.£"' I S'
I [ •o,.,.,_ 'o411,. ...,
~ f ~
Pr~ll()Of'WYt
lldloSquafe
Te Winkle i
Pork / ·1
nd
p
,f
(,~1Strl"C!l
Santa Ana Country
Club
Upper N!!Wport
BoyNocure
Preserve
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
6
EXHIBIT 1-B: SITE PLAN
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
7
This page was intentionally left blank
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
8
2 CLIMATE CHANGE SETTING
2.1 INTRODUCTION TO GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE (GCC)
GCC is defined as the change in average meteorological conditions on the earth with respect to
temperature, precipitation, and storms. The majority of scientists believe that the climate shift
taking place since the Industrial Revolution is occurring at a quicker rate and magnitude than in
the past. Scientific evidence suggests that GCC is the result of increased concentrations of GHGs
in the earth’s atmosphere, including carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O),
and fluorinated gases. The majority of scientists believe that this increased rate of climate change
is the result of GHGs resulting from human activity and industrialization over the past 200 years.
An individual project, like the Project evaluated in this GHGA, cannot generate enough GHG
emissions to affect a discernible change in global climate. However, the Project may participate
in the potential for GCC by its incremental contribution of GHGs combined with the cumulative
increase of all other sources of GHGs, which when taken together constitute potential influences
on GCC. Because these changes may have serious environmental consequences, Section 3 will
evaluate the potential for the Project to have a significant effect upon the environment as a result
of its potential contribution to the greenhouse effect.
2.2 GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE DEFINED
GCC refers to the change in average meteorological conditions on the earth with respect to
temperature, wind patterns, precipitation, and storms. Global temperatures are regulated by
naturally occurring atmospheric gases such as water vapor, CO2, N2O, CH4, hydrofluorocarbons
(HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). These particular gases are
important due to their residence time (duration they stay) in the atmosphere, which ranges from
10 years to more than 100 years. These gases allow solar radiation into the earth’s atmosphere,
but prevent radiative heat from escaping, thus warming the earth’s atmosphere. GCC can occur
naturally as it has in the past with the previous ice ages.
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are often referred to as GHGs. GHGs are released into
the atmosphere by both natural and anthropogenic activity. Without the natural GHG effect, the
earth’s average temperature would be approximately 61 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) cooler than it is
currently. The cumulative accumulation of these gases in the earth’s atmosphere is considered
to be the cause for the observed increase in the earth’s temperature.
2.3 GHGS
2.3.1 GHGS AND HEALTH EFFECTS
GHGs trap heat in the atmosphere, creating a GHG effect that results in global warming and
climate change. Many gases demonstrate these properties as discussed in Table 2-1. For the
purposes of this analysis, emissions of CO2, CH4, and N2O were evaluated (see Table 3-6 later in
this report) because these gases are the primary contributors to GCC from development projects.
Although there are other substances such as fluorinated gases that also contribute to GCC, these
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
9
fluorinated gases were not evaluated as their sources are not well-defined and do not contain
accepted emissions factors or methodology to accurately calculate these gases.
TABLE 2-1: GHGS
GHGs Description Sources Health Effects
Water Water is the most abundant,
important, and variable GHG in
the atmosphere. Water vapor is
not considered a pollutant; in
the atmosphere, it maintains a
climate necessary for life.
Changes in its concentration are
primarily considered to be a
result of climate feedbacks
related to the warming of the
atmosphere rather than a direct
result of industrialization.
Climate feedback is an indirect,
or secondary, change, either
positive or negative, that occurs
within the climate system in
response to a forcing
mechanism. The feedback loop
in which water is involved is
critically important to projecting
future climate change.
As the temperature of the
atmosphere rises, more water is
evaporated from ground storage
(rivers, oceans, reservoirs, soil).
Because the air is warmer, the
relative humidity can be higher
(in essence, the air is able to
‘hold’ more water when it is
warmer), leading to more water
vapor in the atmosphere. As a
GHG, the higher concentration of
water vapor is then able to
absorb more thermal indirect
energy radiated from the earth,
thus further warming the
atmosphere. The warmer
atmosphere can then hold more
water vapor and so on. This is
referred to as a “positive
feedback loop.” The extent to
which this positive feedback loop
would continue is unknown as
there are also dynamics that
hold the positive feedback loop
The main source of
water vapor is
evaporation from
the oceans
(approximately
85%). Other sources
include evaporation
from other water
bodies, sublimation
(change from solid to
gas) from sea ice and
snow, and
transpiration from
plant leaves.
There are no known direct
health effects related to
water vapor at this time. It
should be noted however
that when some pollutants
react with water vapor, the
reaction forms a transport
mechanism for some of
these pollutants to enter the
human body through water
vapor.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
10
GHGs Description Sources Health Effects
in check. As an example, when
water vapor increases in the
atmosphere, more of it would
eventually condense into clouds,
which are more able to reflect
incoming solar radiation (thus
allowing less energy to reach the
earth’s surface and heat it up)
(11).
CO2 CO2 is an odorless and colorless
GHG. Since the industrial
revolution began in the mid-
1700s, the sort of human activity
that increases GHG emissions
has increased dramatically in
scale and distribution. Data from
the past 50 years suggests a
corollary increase in levels and
concentrations. As an example,
prior to the industrial revolution,
CO2 concentrations were fairly
stable at 280 parts per million
(ppm). Today, they are around
370 ppm, an increase of more
than 30%. Left unchecked, the
concentration of CO2 in the
atmosphere is projected to
increase to a minimum of 540
ppm by 2100 as a direct result of
anthropogenic sources (12).
CO2 is emitted from
natural and
manmade sources.
Natural sources
include: the
decomposition of
dead organic matter;
respiration of
bacteria, plants,
animals, and fungus;
evaporation from
oceans; and volcanic
outgassing.
Anthropogenic
sources include: the
burning of coal, oil,
natural gas, and
wood. CO2 is
naturally removed
from the air by
photosynthesis,
dissolution into
ocean water,
transfer to soils and
ice caps, and
chemical weathering
of carbonate rocks
(13).
Outdoor levels of CO2 are not
high enough to result in
negative health effects.
According to the National
Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH)
high concentrations of CO2
can result in health effects
such as: headaches,
dizziness, restlessness,
difficulty breathing,
sweating, increased heart
rate, increased cardiac
output, increased blood
pressure, coma, asphyxia,
and/or convulsions. It should
be noted that current
concentrations of CO2 in the
earth’s atmosphere are
estimated to be
approximately 370 ppm, the
actual reference exposure
level (level at which adverse
health effects typically
occur) is at exposure levels
of 5,000 ppm averaged over
10 hours in a 40-hour
workweek and short-term
reference exposure levels of
30,000 ppm averaged over a
15-minute period (14).
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
11
GHGs Description Sources Health Effects
CH4 CH4 is an extremely effective
absorber of radiation, although
its atmospheric concentration is
less than CO2 and its lifetime in
the atmosphere is brief (10-12
years), compared to other GHGs.
CH4 in the
atmosphere is
generated by many
different sources,
such as fossil fuel
production,
transport and use,
from the decay of
organic matter in
wetlands, and as a
byproduct of
digestion by
ruminant animals
such as cows.
Determining which
specific sources are
responsible for
variations in annual
increases of CH4 is
complex, but
scientists estimate
that fossil fuel
production and use
contributes roughly
30% of the total CH4
emissions. These
industrial sources of
CH4 are relatively
simple to pinpoint
and control using
current technology
(15).
CH4 is extremely reactive
with oxidizers, halogens, and
other halogen-containing
compounds. Exposure to
elevated levels of CH4 can
cause asphyxiation, loss of
consciousness, headache
and dizziness, nausea and
vomiting, weakness, loss of
coordination, and an
increased breathing rate.
N2O N2O, also known as laughing gas,
is a colorless GHG.
Concentrations of N2O also
began to rise at the beginning of
the industrial revolution. In
1998, the global concentration
was 314 parts per billion (ppb).
N2O is produced by
microbial processes
in soil and water,
including those
reactions which
occur in fertilizer
containing nitrogen.
In addition to
agricultural sources,
some industrial
processes (fossil
fuel-fired power
plants, nylon
production, nitric
acid production, and
vehicle emissions)
N2O can cause dizziness,
euphoria, and sometimes
slight hallucinations. In small
doses, it is considered
harmless. However, in some
cases, heavy and extended
use can cause Olney’s
Lesions (brain damage) (16).
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
12
GHGs Description Sources Health Effects
also contribute to its
atmospheric load. It
is used as an aerosol
spray propellant, i.e.,
in whipped cream
bottles. It is also
used in potato chip
bags to keep chips
fresh. It is used in
rocket engines and
in race cars. N2O can
be transported into
the stratosphere, be
deposited on the
earth’s surface, and
be converted to
other compounds by
chemical reaction
(16).
Chlorofluorocarbons
(CFCs)
CFCs are gases formed
synthetically by replacing all
hydrogen atoms in CH4 or ethane
(C2H6) with chlorine and/or
fluorine atoms. CFCs are
nontoxic, nonflammable,
insoluble and chemically
unreactive in the troposphere
(the level of air at the earth’s
surface).
CFCs have no natural
source. They are
found in aerosol
sprays, blowing
agents for foams and
packing materials, as
solvents, and as
refrigerants. (17).
In confined indoor locations,
working with CFC-113 or
other CFCs is thought to
result in death by cardiac
arrhythmia (heart frequency
too high or too low) or
asphyxiation.
HFCs HFCs are synthetic, man-made
chemicals that are used as a
substitute for CFCs. Out of all the
GHGs, they are one of three
groups with the highest global
warming potential (GWP). The
HFCs with the largest measured
atmospheric abundances are (in
order), Fluoroform (HFC-23),
1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-
134a), and 1,1-difluoroethane
(HFC-152a). Prior to 1990, the
only significant emissions were
of HFC-23. HCF-134a emissions
are increasing due to its use as a
refrigerant.
HFCs are manmade
for applications such
as automobile air
conditioners and
refrigerants.
No health effects are known
to result from exposure to
HFCs.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
13
GHGs Description Sources Health Effects
PFCs PFCs have stable molecular
structures and do not break
down through chemical
processes in the lower
atmosphere. High-energy
ultraviolet rays, which occur
about 60 kilometers above
earth’s surface, are able to
destroy the compounds. Because
of this, PFCs have exceptionally
long lifetimes, between 10,000
and 50,000 years. Two common
PFCs are tetrafluoromethane
(CF4) and hexafluoroethane
(C2F6). The EPA estimates that
concentrations of CF4 in the
atmosphere are over 70 parts
per trillion (ppt).
The two main
sources of PFCs are
primary aluminum
production and
semiconductor
manufacture.
No health effects are known
to result from exposure to
PFCs.
SF6 SF6 is an inorganic, odorless,
colorless, nontoxic,
nonflammable gas. It also has
the highest GWP of any gas
evaluated (23,900) (18). The EPA
indicates that concentrations in
the 1990s were about 4 ppt.
SF6 is used for
insulation in electric
power transmission
and distribution
equipment, in the
magnesium industry,
in semiconductor
manufacturing, and
as a tracer gas for
leak detection.
In high concentrations in
confined areas, the gas
presents the hazard of
suffocation because it
displaces the oxygen needed
for breathing.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
14
GHGs Description Sources Health Effects
Nitrogen Trifluoride
(NF3)
NF3 is a colorless gas with a
distinctly moldy odor. The World
Resources Institute (WRI)
indicates that NF3 has a 100-year
GWP of 17,200 (19).
NF3 is used in
industrial processes
and is produced in
the manufacturing of
semiconductors,
Liquid Crystal Display
(LCD) panels, types
of solar panels, and
chemical lasers.
Long-term or repeated
exposure may affect the liver
and kidneys and may cause
fluorosis (20).
The potential health effects related directly to the emissions of CO2, CH4, and N2O as they relate
to development projects, such as the Project, are still being debated in the scientific community.
Their cumulative effects to GCC have the potential to cause adverse effects to human health.
Increases in Earth’s ambient temperatures would result in more intense heat waves, causing
more heat-related deaths. Exhibit 2-A presents the potential impacts of global warming (21).
EXHIBIT 2-A: SUMMARY OF PROJECTED GLOBAL WARMING IMPACT, 2070-2099 (AS COMPARED WITH 1961-1990)
Source: Barbara H. Allen-Diaz. “Climate change affects us all.” University of California, Agriculture and Natural Resources, 2009.
Higher
Emissions
Scenario
Medium-
High
Emi ss ions
Scenario
Lower
Emissions
Scenario
13°F
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
0
Higher
Warming Range
(8-10.5°F)
Medium
Warming Range
(5.S-8°F)
Low er
Warming Range
(3-5.5°F)
• !IQlll, loss In Sierra sn-saack
• 22-.30 lnchm d-1-1 rl•
• 3-4tlrnes as many hu:WlM! dap In ffl¥11' urban aenters
• 4-ltlmm • many....,_.alllll dNlhl In major urban mntan
• 2.5 11mm mara crltlclllJ dry JNII
• 20'lll lncnase m energy demand
70-80% loss in Sierra snowpack
14-22 inches of sea leve l rise
2.5-4 times as many heat wave days in major urban centers
2-6 times as many heat-related deaths in major urban centers
75-85% increase in days conducive to ozone formation*
2-2.5 times more critically dry years
10% increase in electricity demand
30% decrease in forest yields (pine)
55% increase in the expected risk of large w ildfires
30-60% loss in Sierra snow pack
6-14 inches of sea level rise
2-2.5 times as many heat w ave days in major urban centers
2-3 times as many heat-related deaths in major urban centers
25-35% increase in days conducive to ozone formation*
Upto l.5times more critically dry years
3-6% increase in electricity demand
7-14% decrease in forest yields (pine)
10-35% increase in the risk of large w ildfires
* For high ozo ne locations in Los Angeles (R iverside)and the Sa n Joaq uin Va lley (Visali a)
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
15
2.4 GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIAL (GWP)
GHGs have varying GWP values. GWP of a GHG indicates the amount of warming a gas cause over
a given period of time and represents the potential of a gas to trap heat in the atmosphere. CO2
is utilized as the reference gas for GWP, and thus has a GWP of 1. CO2 equivalent (CO2e) is a term
used for describing the different GHGs in a common unit. CO2e signifies the amount of CO2 which
would have the equivalent GWP.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the international body for assessing the
science related to climate change. IPCC Assessment Reports cover the full scientific, technical and
socio-economic assessment of climate change. The atmospheric lifetime and GWP of selected
GHGs are summarized at Table 2-2. As shown in the table below, GWP for the 2nd Assessment
Report range from 1 for CO2 to 23,900 for SF6 and GWP for the 6th Assessment Report range from
1 for CO2 to 25,200 for SF6 (22).
TABLE 2-2: GWP AND ATMOSPHERIC LIFETIME OF SELECT GHGS
Gas Atmospheric Lifetime
(years)
GWP (100-year time horizon)
2nd Assessment Report 6th Assessment Report
CO2 Multiple 1 1
CH4 11.8 21 28
N2O 109 310 273
HFC-23 228 11,700 14,600
HFC-134a 14 1,300 1,526
HFC-152a 1.6 140 164
SF6 3,200 23,900 25,200
Source: IPCC Second Assessment Report, 1995 and IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, 2023
2.5 GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORIES
2.5.1 GLOBAL
Worldwide anthropogenic GHG emissions are tracked by the IPCC for industrialized nations
(referred to as Annex I) and developing nations (referred to as Non-Annex I). Human GHG
emissions data for Annex I nations are available through 2021. Based on the latest available data,
the sum of these emissions totaled approximately 28,272,940 gigagram (Gg) CO2e 1 (23) (24) as
summarized on Table 2-3.
1 The global emissions are the sum of Annex I and non-Annex I countries, without counting Land-Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF).
For countries without 2021 data, the United Nations’ Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) data for the most recent year
were used U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, “Annex I Parties – GHG total without LULUCF,” The most recent GHG emissions
for China and India are from 2014 and 2016, respectively.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
16
2.5.2 UNITED STATES
As noted in Table 2-3, the United States, as a single country, was the number two producer of
GHG emissions in 2021.
TABLE 2-3: TOP GHG PRODUCING COUNTRIES AND THE EUROPEAN UNION
Emitting Countries GHG Emissions (Gg CO2e)
China 12,300,200
United States 6,340,228
European Union (27-member countries) 3,468,394
India 2,839,425
Russian Federation 2,156,599
Japan 1,168,094
Total 28,272,940
2.5.3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
California has significantly slowed the rate of growth of GHG emissions due to the
implementation of energy efficiency programs as well as adoption of strict emission controls but
is still a substantial contributor to the United States (U.S.) emissions inventory total (16). The
California Air Resource Board (CARB) compiles GHG inventories for the State of California. Based
upon the 2023 GHG inventory data (i.e., the latest year for which data are available) for the 2000-
2021 GHG emissions period, California emitted an average 381.3 million metric tons of CO2e per
year (MMTCO2e/yr) or 381,300 Gg CO2e (6.01% of the total United States GHG emissions) (25).
Based on data published by the U.S. Energy Information Administration, California’s per capita
(9.12 metric tons) GHG emissions are much less than the nationwide per capita (15.8 metric ton)
average (26).
2.6 EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN CALIFORNIA
2.6.1 PUBLIC HEALTH
Higher temperatures may increase the frequency, duration, and intensity of conditions conducive
to air pollution formation. For example, days with weather conducive to ozone formation could
increase from 25 to 35% under the lower warming range to 75 to 85% under the medium
warming range. In addition, if global background ozone levels increase as predicted in some
scenarios, it may become impossible to meet local air quality standards. Air quality could be
further compromised by increases in wildfires, which emit fine particulate matter that can travel
long distances, depending on wind conditions. Based on Our Changing Climate Assessing the
Risks to California by the California Climate Change Center, large wildfires could become up to
55% more frequent if GHG emissions are not significantly reduced (27).
In addition, under the higher warming range scenario, there could be up to 100 more days per
year with temperatures above 90°F in Los Angeles and 95°F in Sacramento by 2100. This is a
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
17
significant increase over historical patterns and approximately twice the increase projected if
temperatures remain within or below the lower warming range. Rising temperatures could
increase the risk of death from dehydration, heat stroke/exhaustion, heart attack, stroke, and
respiratory distress caused by extreme heat.
2.6.2 WATER RESOURCES
A vast network of man-made reservoirs and aqueducts captures and transports water throughout
the state from northern California rivers and the Colorado River. The current distribution system
relies on Sierra Nevada snowpack to supply water during the dry spring and summer months.
Rising temperatures, potentially compounded by decreases in precipitation, could severely
reduce spring snowpack, increasing the risk of summer water shortages.
If temperatures continue to increase, more precipitation could fall as rain instead of snow, and
the snow that does fall could melt earlier, reducing the Sierra Nevada spring snowpack by as
much as 70 to 90%. Under the lower warming range scenario, snowpack losses could be only half
as large as those possible if temperatures were to rise to the higher warming range. How much
snowpack could be lost depends in part on future precipitation patterns, the projections for
which remain uncertain. However, even under the wetter climate projections, the loss of
snowpack could pose challenges to water managers and hamper hydropower generation. It could
also adversely affect winter tourism. Under the lower warming range, the ski season at lower
elevations could be reduced by as much as a month. If temperatures reach the higher warming
range and precipitation declines, there might be many years with insufficient snow for skiing and
snowboarding.
The State’s water supplies are also at risk from rising sea levels. An influx of saltwater could
degrade California’s estuaries, wetlands, and groundwater aquifers. Saltwater intrusion caused
by rising sea levels is a major threat to the quality and reliability of water within the southern
edge of the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Delta – a major fresh water supply.
2.6.3 AGRICULTURE
Increased temperatures could cause widespread changes to the agriculture industry reducing the
quantity and quality of agricultural products statewide. First, California farmers could possibly
lose as much as 25% of the water supply needed. Although higher CO2 levels can stimulate plant
production and increase plant water-use efficiency, California’s farmers could face greater water
demand for crops and a less reliable water supply as temperatures rise. Crop growth and
development could change, as could the intensity and frequency of pest and disease outbreaks.
Rising temperatures could aggravate ozone pollution, which makes plants more susceptible to
disease and pests and interferes with plant growth.
Plant growth tends to be slow at low temperatures, increasing with rising temperatures up to a
threshold. However, faster growth can result in less-than-optimal development for many crops,
so rising temperatures could worsen the quantity and quality of yield for a number of California’s
agricultural products. Products likely to be most affected include wine grapes, fruits, and nuts.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
18
In addition, continued GCC could shift the ranges of existing invasive plants and weeds and alter
competition patterns with native plants. Range expansion could occur in many species while
range contractions may be less likely in rapidly evolving species with significant populations
already established. Should range contractions occur, new or different weed species could fill the
emerging gaps. Continued GCC could alter the abundance and types of many pests, lengthen
pests’ breeding season, and increase pathogen growth rates.
2.6.4 FORESTS AND LANDSCAPES
GCC has the potential to intensify the current threat to forests and landscapes by increasing the
risk of wildfire and altering the distribution and character of natural vegetation. If temperatures
rise into the medium warming range, the risk of large wildfires in California could increase by as
much as 55%, which is almost twice the increase expected if temperatures stay in the lower
warming range. However, since wildfire risk is determined by a combination of factors, including
precipitation, winds, temperature, and landscape and vegetation conditions, future risks would
not be uniform throughout the state. In contrast, wildfires in northern California could increase
by up to 90% due to decreased precipitation.
Moreover, continued GCC has the potential to alter natural ecosystems and biological diversity
within the state. For example, alpine and subalpine ecosystems could decline by as much as 60
to 80% by the end of the century as a result of increasing temperatures. The productivity of the
state’s forests has the potential to decrease as a result of GCC.
2.6.5 RISING SEA LEVELS
Rising sea levels, more intense coastal storms, and warmer water temperatures could
increasingly threaten the state’s coastal regions. Under the higher warming range scenario, sea
level is anticipated to rise 22 to 35 inches by 2100. Elevations of this magnitude would inundate
low-lying coastal areas with saltwater, accelerate coastal erosion, threaten vital levees and inland
water systems, and disrupt wetlands and natural habitats. Under the lower warming range
scenario, sea level could rise 12-14 inches.
2.7 REGULATORY SETTING
2.7.1 INTERNATIONAL
Climate change is a global issue involving GHG emissions from all around the world; therefore,
countries such as the ones discussed below have made an effort to reduce GHGs.
IPCC
In 1988, the United Nations (U.N.) and the World Meteorological Organization established the IPCC
to assess the scientific, technical, and socioeconomic information relevant to understanding the
scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts, and options for
adaptation and mitigation.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
19
UNITED NATION’S FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE (UNFCCC)
On March 21, 1994, the U.S. joined a number of countries around the world in signing the
Convention. Under the UNFCCC, governments gather and share information on GHG emissions,
national policies, and best practices; launch national strategies for addressing GHG emissions and
adapting to expected impacts, including the provision of financial and technological support to
developing countries; and cooperate in preparing for adaptation to the impacts of climate
change.
INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE CHANGE TREATIES
The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the UNFCCC. The major feature of the
Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the European
community for reducing GHG emissions at an average of 5% against 1990 levels over the five-
year period 2008–2012. The Convention (as discussed above) encouraged industrialized
countries to stabilize emissions; however, the Protocol commits them to do so. Developed
countries have contributed more emissions over the last 150 years; therefore, the Protocol places
a heavier burden on developed nations under the principle of “common but differentiated
responsibilities.”
In 2001, President George W. Bush indicated that he would not submit the treaty to the U.S.
Senate for ratification, which effectively ended American involvement in the Kyoto Protocol. In
December 2009, international leaders met in Copenhagen to address the future of international
climate change commitments post-Kyoto. No binding agreement was reached in Copenhagen;
however, the UN Climate Change Committee identified the long-term goal of limiting the
maximum global average temperature increase to no more than 2 degrees Celsius (°C) above pre-
industrial levels, subject to a review in 2015. The Committee held additional meetings in Durban,
South Africa in November 2011; Doha, Qatar in November 2012; and Warsaw, Poland in
November 2013. The meetings gradually gained consensus among participants on individual
climate change issues.
On September 23, 2014, more than 100 Heads of State and Government and leaders from the
private sector and civil society met at the Climate Summit in New York hosted by the U.N. At the
Summit, heads of government, business and civil society announced actions in areas that would
have the greatest impact on reducing emissions, including climate finance, energy, transport,
industry, agriculture, cities, forests, and building resilience.
Parties to the UNFCCC reached a landmark agreement on December 12, 2015, in Paris, charting
a fundamentally new course in the two-decade-old global climate effort. Culminating a four-year
negotiating round, the new treaty ends the strict differentiation between developed and
developing countries that characterized earlier efforts, replacing it with a common framework
that commits all countries to put forward their best efforts and to strengthen them in the years
ahead. This includes, for the first time, requirements that all parties report regularly on their
emissions and implementation efforts and undergo international review.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
20
The agreement and a companion decision by parties were the key outcomes of the conference,
known as the 21st session of the UNFCCC Conference of the Parties (COP) 21. Together, the Paris
Agreement and the accompanying COP decision:
• Reaffirm the goal of limiting global temperature increase well below 2°C, while urging efforts to
limit the increase to 1.5 degrees;
• Establish binding commitments by all parties to make “nationally determined contributions”
(NDCs), and to pursue domestic measures aimed at achieving them;
• Commit all countries to report regularly on their emissions and “progress made in implementing
and achieving” their NDCs, and to undergo international review;
• Commit all countries to submit new NDCs every five years, with the clear expectation that they
would “represent a progression” beyond previous ones;
• Reaffirm the binding obligations of developed countries under the UNFCCC to support the efforts
of developing countries, while for the first time encouraging voluntary contributions by
developing countries too;
• Extend the current goal of mobilizing $100 billion a year in support by 2020 through 2025, with a
new, higher goal to be set for the period after 2025;
• Extend a mechanism to address “loss and damage” resulting from climate change, which explicitly
would not “involve or provide a basis for any liability or compensation;”
• Require parties engaging in international emissions trading to avoid “double counting;” and
• Call for a new mechanism, similar to the Clean Development Mechanism under the Kyoto
Protocol, enabling emission reductions in one country to be counted toward another country’s
NDC (C2ES 2015a) (28).
Following President Biden’s day one executive order, the United States officially rejoined the
landmark Paris Agreement on February 19, 2021, positioning the country to once again be part
of the global climate solution. Meanwhile, city, state, business, and civic leaders across the
country and around the world have been ramping up efforts to drive the clean energy advances
needed to meet the goals of the agreement and put the brakes on dangerous climate change.
2.7.2 NATIONAL
Prior to the last decade, there have been no concrete federal regulations of GHGs or major
planning for climate change adaptation. The following are actions regarding the federal
government, GHGs, and fuel efficiency.
GHG ENDANGERMENT
In Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency 549 U.S. 497 (2007), decided on April 2,
2007, the United States Supreme Court (Supreme Court) found that four GHGs, including CO2,
are air pollutants subject to regulation under Section 202(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The
Supreme Court held that the EPA Administrator must determine whether emissions of GHGs from
new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution, which may reasonably be anticipated to
endanger public health or welfare, or whether the science is too uncertain to make a reasoned
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
21
decision. On December 7, 2009, the EPA Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding
GHGs under Section 202(a) of the CAA:
• Endangerment Finding: The Administrator finds that the current and projected concentrations of
the six key well-mixed GHGs— CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6—in the atmosphere threaten
the public health and welfare of current and future generations.
• Cause or Contribute Finding: The Administrator finds that the combined emissions of these well-
mixed GHGs from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the GHG
pollution, which threatens public health and welfare.
These findings do not impose requirements on industry or other entities. However, this was a
prerequisite for implementing GHG emissions standards for vehicles, as discussed in the section
“Clean Vehicles” below. After a lengthy legal challenge, the Supreme Court declined to review an
Appeals Court ruling that upheld the EPA Administrator’s findings (29).
CLEAN VEHICLES
Congress first passed the Corporate Average Fuel Economy law in 1975 to increase the fuel
economy of cars and light duty trucks. The law has become more stringent over time. On May
19, 2009, President Obama put in motion a new national policy to increase fuel economy for all
new cars and trucks sold in the U.S. On April 1, 2010, the EPA, and the Department of
Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced a joint final
rule establishing a national program that would reduce GHG emissions and improve fuel
economy for new cars and trucks sold in the U.S.
The first phase of the national program applies to passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-
duty (MD) passenger vehicles, covering model years 2012 through 2016. They require these
vehicles to meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of CO2 per mile,
equivalent to 35.5 miles per gallon (mpg) if the automobile industry were to meet this CO2 level
solely through fuel economy improvements. Together, these standards would cut CO2 emissions
by an estimated 960 million metric tons and 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of the
vehicles sold under the program (model years 2012–2016). In August 2012, the EPA and the
NHTSA issued final rules on a second-phase joint rulemaking establishing national standards for
light-duty vehicles for model years 2017 through 2025. The new standards apply to passenger
cars, light-duty trucks, and MD passenger vehicles. The final standards are projected to result in
an average industry fleetwide level of 163 grams/mile of CO2 in model year 2025, which is
equivalent to 54.5 mpg if achieved exclusively through fuel economy improvements.
The EPA and the U.S. Department of Transportation issued final rules for the first national
standards to reduce GHG emissions and improve fuel efficiency of heavy-duty trucks (HDT) and
buses on September 15, 2011, effective November 14, 2011. For combination tractors, the
agencies are proposing engine and vehicle standards that begin in the 2014 model year and
achieve up to a 20% reduction in CO2 emissions and fuel consumption by the 2018 model year.
For HDT and vans, the agencies are proposing separate gasoline and diesel truck standards, which
phase in starting in the 2014 model year and achieve up to a 10% reduction for gasoline vehicles
and a 15% reduction for diesel vehicles by the 2018 model year (12 and 17%, respectively if
accounting for air conditioning leakage). Lastly, for vocational vehicles, the engine and vehicle
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
22
standards would achieve up to a 10% reduction in fuel consumption and CO2 emissions from the
2014 to 2018 model years.
On April 2, 2018, the EPA signed the Mid-term Evaluation Final Determination, which declared
that the MY 2022-2025 GHG standards are not appropriate and should be revised (30). This Final
Determination serves to initiate a notice to further consider appropriate standards for MY 2022-
2025 light-duty vehicles. On August 2, 2018, the NHTSA in conjunction with the EPA, released a
notice of proposed rulemaking, the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model
Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks (SAFE Vehicles Rule). The SAFE Vehicles Rule
was proposed to amend existing Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) and tailpipe CO2
standards for passenger cars and light trucks and to establish new standards covering model
years 2021 through 2026. As of March 31, 2020, the NHTSA and EPA finalized the SAFE Vehicle
Rule which increased stringency of CAFE and CO2 emissions standards by 1.5% each year through
model year 2026 (31). On December 21, 2021, after reviewing all the public comments submitted
on NHTSA’s April 2021 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, NHTSA finalizes the CAFE Preemption
rulemaking to withdraw its portions of the so-called SAFE I Rule. The final rule concludes that the
SAFE I Rule overstepped the agency’s legal authority and established overly broad prohibitions
that did not account for a variety of important state and local interests. The final rule ensures
that the SAFE I Rule will no longer form an improper barrier to states exploring creative solutions
to address their local communities’ environmental and public health challenges (32).
On March 31, 2022, NHTSA finalized CAFE standards for MY 2024-2026. The standards for
passenger cars and light trucks for MYs 2024-2025 were increased at a rate of 8% per year and
then increased at a rate of 10% per year for MY 2026 vehicles. NHTSA currently projects that the
revised standards would require an industry fleet-wide average of roughly 49 mpg in MY 2026
and would reduce average fuel outlays over the lifetimes of affected vehicles that provide
consumers hundreds of dollars in net savings. These standards are directly responsive to the
agency’s statutory mandate to improve energy conservation and reduce the nation’s energy
dependence on foreign sources (33).
MANDATORY REPORTING OF GHGS
The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008, passed in December 2007, requires the
establishment of mandatory GHG reporting requirements. On September 22, 2009, the EPA
issued the Final Mandatory Reporting of GHGs Rule, which became effective January 1, 2010. The
rule requires reporting of GHG emissions from large sources and suppliers in the U.S. and is
intended to collect accurate and timely emissions data to inform future policy decisions. Under
the rule, suppliers of fossil fuels or industrial GHGs, manufacturers of vehicles and engines, and
facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons per year (MT/yr) or more GHG emissions are required to
submit annual reports to the EPA.
NEW SOURCE REVIEW
The EPA issued a final rule on May 13, 2010, that establishes thresholds for GHGs that define
when permits under the New Source Review Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V
Operating Permit programs are required for new and existing industrial facilities. This final rule
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
23
“tailors” the requirements of these CAA permitting programs to limit which facilities would be
required to obtain Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V permits. In the preamble to
the revisions to the Federal Code of Regulations, the EPA states:
“This rulemaking is necessary because without it the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration and Title V requirements would apply, as of January 2, 2011, at the
100 or 250 tons per year levels provided under the CAA, greatly increasing the
number of required permits, imposing undue costs on small sources, overwhelming
the resources of permitting authorities, and severely impairing the functioning of
the programs. EPA is relieving these resource burdens by phasing in the
applicability of these programs to GHG sources, starting with the largest GHG
emitters. This rule establishes two initial steps of the phase-in. The rule also
commits the agency to take certain actions on future steps addressing smaller
sources but excludes certain smaller sources from Prevention of Significant
Deterioration and Title V permitting for GHG emissions until at least April 30,
2016.”
The EPA estimates that facilities responsible for nearly 70% of the national GHG emissions from
stationary sources would be subject to permitting requirements under this rule. This includes the
nation’s largest GHG emitters—power plants, refineries, and cement production facilities.
STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR GHG EMISSIONS FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES: ELECTRIC UTILITY GENERATING
UNITS
As required by a settlement agreement, the EPA proposed new performance standards for
emissions of CO2 for new, affected, fossil fuel-fired electric utility generating units on March 27,
2012. New sources greater than 25 megawatts (MW) would be required to meet an output-
based standard of 1,000 pounds (lbs) of CO2 per MW-hour (MWh), based on the performance of
widely used natural gas combined cycle technology. It should be noted that on February 9, 2016,
the Supreme Court issued a stay of this regulation pending litigation. Additionally, the current
EPA Administrator has also signed a measure to repeal the Clean Power Plan, including the CO2
standards. The Clean Power Plan was officially repealed on June 19, 2019, when the EPA issued
the final Affordable Clean Energy rule (ACE). Under ACE, new state-specific emission guidelines
were established that provided existing coal-fired electric utility generating units with achievable
standards.
On January 19, 2021, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the EPA’s ACE Rule for GHG
emissions from power plants rested on an erroneous interpretation of the CAA that barred EPA
from considering measures beyond those that apply at and to an individual source. The court
therefore vacated and remanded the ACE Rule and adopted a replacement rule which regulates
CO2 emissions from existing power plants, potentially again considering generation shifting and
other measures to more aggressively target power sector emissions.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
24
CAP-AND-TRADE
Cap-and-trade refers to a policy tool where emissions are limited to a certain amount and can be
traded or provides flexibility on how the emitter can comply. Successful examples in the U.S.
include the Acid Rain Program and the N2O Budget Trading Program and Clean Air Interstate Rule
in the northeast. There is no federal GHG cap-and-trade program currently; however, some states
have joined to create initiatives to provide a mechanism for cap-and-trade.
The Regional GHG Initiative is an effort to reduce GHGs among the states of Connecticut,
Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and
Vermont. Each state caps CO2 emissions from power plants, auctions CO2 emission allowances,
and invests the proceeds in strategic energy programs that further reduce emissions, save
consumers money, create jobs, and build a clean energy economy. The Initiative began in 2008
and has retained all participating states as of 2020.
The Western Climate Initiative (WCI) partner jurisdictions have developed a comprehensive
initiative to reduce regional GHG emissions to 15% below 2005 levels by 2020. The partners were
originally California, British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec. However, Manitoba and
Ontario are not currently participating. California linked with Quebec’s cap-and-trade system
January 1, 2014, and joint offset auctions took place in 2015. While the WCI has yet to publish
whether it has successfully reached the 2020 emissions goal initiative set in 2007, SB 32 requires
that California, a major partner in the WCI, adopt the goal of reducing statewide GHG emissions
to 40% below the 1990 level by 2030.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 13990
On January 20, 2021, Federal agencies were directed to immediately review, and take action to
address, Federal regulations promulgated and other actions taken during the last 4 years that
conflict with national objectives to improve public health and the environment; ensure access to
clean air and water; limit exposure to dangerous chemicals and pesticides; hold polluters
accountable, including those who disproportionately harm communities of color and low-income
communities; reduce GHG emissions; bolster resilience to the impacts of climate change; restore
and expand our national treasures and monuments; and prioritize both environmental justice
and employment.
2.7.3 CALIFORNIA
California has a long history of adopting regulations to improve energy efficiency in new and
remodeled buildings. These regulations have kept California’s energy consumption relatively flat
even with rapid population growth.
2.7.3.1 LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS TO REDUCE GHGS
The State of California legislature has enacted a series of bills that constitute the most aggressive
program to reduce GHGs of any state in the nation. Some legislation, such as the landmark AB
32, was specifically enacted to address GHG emissions. Other legislation, such as Title 24 and Title
20 energy standards, were originally adopted for other purposes such as energy and water
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
25
conservation, but also provide GHG reductions. This section describes the major provisions of the
legislation.
AB 1881
The Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 2006 requires local agencies to adopt the updated
DWR model ordinance or equivalent. AB 1881 also requires the CEC to consult with the DWR to
adopt, by regulation, performance standards and labeling requirements for landscape irrigation
equipment, including irrigation controllers, moisture sensors, emission devices, and valves to
reduce the wasteful, uneconomic, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy or water.
SB 1368
California SB 1368 adds Sections 8340 and 8341 to the Public Utilities Code (effective January 1,
2007) with the intent “to prevent long-term investments in power plants with GHG emissions in
excess of those produced by a combined-cycle natural gas power plant” with the aim of “reducing
emissions of GHGs from the state’s electricity consumption, not just the state’s electricity
production.” SB 1368 provides a mechanism for reducing the GHG emissions of electricity
providers, both in-state and out-of-state, thereby assisting CARB in meeting its mandate under
AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006.
AB 32
The California State Legislature enacted AB 32, which required that GHGs emitted in California
be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020 (this goal has been met2). GHGs, as defined under AB
32, include CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6. Since AB 32 was enacted, a seventh chemical, NF3,
has also been added to the list of GHGs. CARB is the state agency charged with monitoring and
regulating sources of GHGs. Pursuant to AB 32, CARB adopted regulations to achieve the
maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emission reductions. AB 32 states the
following:
“Global warming poses a serious threat to the economic well-being, public health,
natural resources, and the environment of California. The potential adverse
impacts of global warming include the exacerbation of air quality problems, a
reduction in the quality and supply of water to the state from the Sierra snowpack,
a rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of thousands of coastal businesses
and residences, damage to marine ecosystems and the natural environment, and
an increase in the incidences of infectious diseases, asthma, and other human
health-related problems.”
SB 375
On September 30, 2008, SB 375 was signed by Governor Schwarzenegger. According to SB 375, the
transportation sector is the largest contributor of GHG emissions, which emits over 40% of the total
2 Based upon the 2023 GHG inventory data (i.e., the latest year for which data are available) for the 2000-2021 GHG emissions period, California
emitted an average 381.3 MMTCO2e (26). This is less than the 2020 emissions target of 431 MMTCO2e. This is less than the 2020 emissions target
of 431 MMTCO2e.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
26
GHG emissions in California. SB 375 states, “Without improved land use and transportation policy,
California would not be able to achieve the goals of AB 32.” SB 375 does the following: it (1) requires
metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to include sustainable community strategies in their
regional transportation plans for reducing GHG emissions; (2) aligns planning for transportation and
housing; and (3) creates specified incentives for the implementation of the strategies.
SB 375 requires MPOs to prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) within the Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP) that guides growth while taking into account the transportation,
housing, environmental, and economic needs of the region. SB 375 uses CEQA streamlining as an
incentive to encourage residential projects, which help achieve AB 32 goals to reduce GHG
emissions. Although SB 375 does not prevent CARB from adopting additional regulations, such
actions are not anticipated in the foreseeable future.
Concerning CEQA, SB 375, as codified in Public Resources Code Section 21159.28, states that
CEQA findings for certain projects are not required to reference, describe, or discuss (1) growth
inducing impacts, or (2) any project-specific or cumulative impacts from cars and light-duty truck
trips generated by the project on global warming or the regional transportation network, if the
project:
1. Is in an area with an approved sustainable communities strategy or an alternative planning
strategy that CARB accepts as achieving the GHG emission reduction targets.
2. Is consistent with that strategy (in designation, density, building intensity, and applicable policies).
3. Incorporates the MMs required by an applicable prior environmental document.
AB 1493 - PAVLEY FUEL EFFICIENCY STANDARDS
The second phase of the implementation for the Pavley bill was incorporated into Amendments
to the Low-Emission Vehicle Program (LEV III) or the Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) program. The
ACC program combines the control of smog-causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single
coordinated package of requirements for MY 2017 through 2025. The regulation will reduce
GHGs from new cars by 34% from 2016 levels by 2025. The new rules will clean up gasoline and
diesel-powered cars, and deliver increasing numbers of zero-emission technologies, such as full
battery electric cars, newly emerging plug-in hybrid EV and hydrogen fuel cell cars. The package
will also ensure adequate fueling infrastructure is available for the increasing numbers of
hydrogen fuel cell vehicles planned for deployment in California. On March 9,
EPA reinstated California’s authority under the Clean Air Act to implement its own GHG emission
standards for cars and light trucks, which other states can also adopt and enforce. With this
authority restored, EPA will continue partnering with states to advance the next generation of
clean vehicle technologies.
CLEAN ENERGY AND POLLUTION REDUCTION ACT OF 2015 (SB 350)
In October 2015, the legislature approved, and Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 350, which
reaffirms California’s commitment to reducing its GHG emissions and addressing climate change.
Key provisions include an increase in the RPS, higher energy efficiency requirements for buildings,
initial strategies towards a regional electricity grid, and improved infrastructure for EV charging
stations. Provisions for a 50% reduction in the use of petroleum statewide were removed from
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
27
the Bill because of opposition and concern that it would prevent the Bill’s passage. Specifically,
SB 350 requires the following to reduce statewide GHG emissions:
• Increase the amount of electricity procured from renewable energy sources from 33% to 50% by
2030, with interim targets of 40% by 2024, and 45% by 2027.
• Double the energy efficiency in existing buildings by 2030. This target would be achieved through
the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), the California Energy Commission (CEC), and
local publicly owned utilities.
• Reorganize the Independent System Operator (ISO) to develop more regional electrify
transmission markets and to improve accessibility in these markets, which would facilitate the
growth of renewable energy markets in the western United States.
SB 32
On September 8, 2016, Governor Brown signed SB 32 and its companion bill, AB 197. SB 32
requires the state to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030, a
reduction target that was first introduced in Executive Order B-30-15. The new legislation builds
upon the AB 32 goal and provides an intermediate goal to achieving S-3-05, which sets a
statewide GHG reduction target of 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. AB 197 creates a legislative
committee to oversee regulators to ensure that CARB not only responds to the Governor, but
also the Legislature (10).
2017 CARB SCOPING PLAN
In November 2017, CARB released the Final 2017 Scoping Plan Update (2017 Scoping Plan), which
identifies the State’s post-2020 reduction strategy. The 2017 Scoping Plan reflects the 2030
target of a 40% reduction below 1990 levels, set by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by SB
32. Key programs that the proposed Second Update builds upon include the Cap-and-Trade
Regulation, the LCFS, and much cleaner cars, trucks, and freight movement, utilizing cleaner,
renewable energy, and strategies to reduce CH4 emissions from agricultural and other wastes.
The 2017 Scoping Plan establishes a new emissions limit of 260 MMTCO2e for the year 2030,
which corresponds to a 40% decrease in 1990 levels by 2030 (34).
California’s climate strategy would require contributions from all sectors of the economy,
including the land base, and would include enhanced focus on zero and near-zero emission
(ZE/NZE) vehicle technologies; continued investment in renewables, including solar roofs, wind,
and other distributed generation; greater use of low carbon fuels; integrated land conservation
and development strategies; coordinated efforts to reduce emissions of short-lived climate
pollutants (CH4, black carbon, and fluorinated gases); and an increased focus on integrated land
use planning to support livable, transit-connected communities and conservation of agricultural
and other lands. Requirements for direct GHG reductions at refineries would further support air
quality co-benefits in neighborhoods, including in disadvantaged communities historically
located adjacent to these large stationary sources, as well as efforts with California’s local air
pollution control and air quality management districts (air districts) to tighten emission limits on
a broad spectrum of industrial sources. Major elements of the 2017 Scoping Plan framework
include:
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
28
• Implementing and/or increasing the standards of the Mobile Source Strategy, which include
increasing zero-emission vehicles (ZEV) buses and trucks.
• LCFS, with an increased stringency (18% by 2030).
• Implementing SB 350, which expands the RPS to 50% RPS and doubles energy efficiency savings
by 2030.
• California Sustainable Freight Action Plan, which improves freight system efficiency, utilizes near-
zero emissions technology, and deployment of ZEV trucks.
• Implementing the proposed Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Strategy (SLPS), which focuses on
reducing CH4 and HCF emissions by 40% and anthropogenic black carbon emissions by 50% by
year 2030.
• Continued implementation of SB 375.
• Post-2020 Cap-and-Trade Program that includes declining caps.
• 20% reduction in GHG emissions from refineries by 2030.
• Development of a Natural and Working Lands Action Plan to secure California’s land base as a net
carbon sink.
Note, however, that the 2017 Scoping Plan acknowledges that:
“[a]chieving net zero increases in GHG emissions, resulting in no contribution to
GHG impacts, may not be feasible or appropriate for every project, however, and
the inability of a project to mitigate its GHG emissions to net zero does not imply
the project results in a substantial contribution to the cumulatively significant
environmental impact of climate change under CEQA.”
In addition to the statewide strategies listed above, the 2017 Scoping Plan also identifies local
governments as essential partners in achieving the State’s long-term GHG reduction goals and
identifies local actions to reduce GHG emissions. As part of the recommended actions, CARB
recommends that local governments achieve a community-wide goal to achieve emissions of no
more than 6 metric tons of CO2e (MTCO2e) or less per capita by 2030 and 2 MTCO2e or less per
capita by 2050. For CEQA projects, CARB states that lead agencies may develop evidence-based
bright-line numeric thresholds—consistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan and the State’s long-term
GHG goals—and projects with emissions over that amount may be required to incorporate on-
site design features and MMs that avoid or minimize project emissions to the degree feasible; or
a performance-based metric using a CAP or other plan to reduce GHG emissions is appropriate.
According to research conducted by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and
supported by CARB, California, under its existing and proposed GHG reduction policies, could
achieve the 2030 goals under SB 32. The research utilized a new, validated model known as the
California LBNL GHG Analysis of Policies Spreadsheet (CALGAPS), which simulates GHG and
criteria pollutant emissions in California from 2010 to 2050 in accordance to existing and future
GHG-reducing policies. The CALGAPS model showed that by 2030, emissions could range from
211 to 428 MTCO2e per year (MTCO2e/yr), indicating that “even if all modeled policies are not
implemented, reductions could be sufficient to reduce emissions 40% below the 1990 level [of
SB 32].” CALGAPS analyzed emissions through 2050 even though it did not generally account for
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
29
policies that might be put in place after 2030. Although the research indicated that the emissions
would not meet the State’s 80% reduction goal by 2050, various combinations of policies could
allow California’s cumulative emissions to remain very low through 2050 (35) (36).
CAP-AND-TRADE PROGRAM
The 2017 Scoping Plan identifies a Cap-and-Trade Program as one of the key strategies for
California to reduce GHG emissions. According to CARB, a cap-and-trade program would help put
California on the path to meet its goal of achieving a 40% reduction in GHG emissions from 1990
levels by 2030. Under cap-and-trade, an overall limit on GHG emissions from capped sectors is
established, and facilities subject to the cap would be able to trade permits to emit GHGs within
the overall limit.
CARB adopted a California Cap-and-Trade Program pursuant to its authority under AB 32. The
Cap-and-Trade Program is designed to reduce GHG emissions from regulated entities by more
than 16% between 2013 and 2020, and by an additional 40% by 2030. The statewide cap for GHG
emissions from the capped sectors (e.g., electricity generation, petroleum refining, and cement
production) commenced in 2013 and would decline over time, achieving GHG emission
reductions throughout the program’s duration.
Covered entities that emit more than 25,000 MTCO2e/yr must comply with the Cap-and-Trade
Program. Triggering of the 25,000 MTCO2e/yr “inclusion threshold” is measured against a subset
of emissions reported and verified under the California Regulation for the Mandatory Reporting
of GHG Emissions (Mandatory Reporting Rule or “MRR”).
Under the Cap-and-Trade Program, CARB issues allowances equal to the total amount of
allowable emissions over a given compliance period and distributes these to regulated entities.
Covered entities are allocated free allowances in whole or part (if eligible), and may buy
allowances at auction, purchase allowances from others, or purchase offset credits. Each covered
entity with a compliance obligation is required to surrender “compliance instruments” for each
MTCO2e of GHG they emit. There also are requirements to surrender compliance instruments
covering 30% of the prior year’s compliance obligation by November of each year (37).
The Cap-and-Trade Program provides a firm cap, which provides the highest certainty of
achieving the 2030 target. An inherent feature of the Cap-and-Trade program is that it does not
guarantee GHG emissions reductions in any discrete location or by any particular source. Rather,
GHG emissions reductions are only guaranteed on an accumulative basis. As summarized by
CARB in the First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan:
“The Cap-and-Trade Regulation gives companies the flexibility to trade allowances
with others or take steps to cost-effectively reduce emissions at their own facilities.
Companies that emit more have to turn in more allowances or other compliance
instruments. Companies that can cut their GHG emissions have to turn in fewer
allowances. But as the cap declines, aggregate emissions must be reduced. In other
words, a covered entity theoretically could increase its GHG emissions every year
and still comply with the Cap-and-Trade Program if there is a reduction in GHG
emissions from other covered entities. Such a focus on aggregate GHG emissions
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
30
is considered appropriate because climate change is a global phenomenon, and
the effects of GHG emissions are considered cumulative.” (38)
The Cap-and-Trade Program covers approximately 80% of California’s GHG emissions (34). The
Cap-and-Trade Program covers the GHG emissions associated with electricity consumed in
California, whether generated in-state or imported. Accordingly, GHG emissions associated with
CEQA projects’ electricity usage are covered by the Cap-and-Trade Program. The Cap-and-Trade
Program also covers fuel suppliers (natural gas and propane fuel providers and transportation
fuel providers) to address emissions from such fuels and from combustion of other fossil fuels
not directly covered at large sources in the Program’s first compliance period. The Cap-and-Trade
Program covers the GHG emissions associated with the combustion of transportation fuels in
California, whether refined in-state or imported.
2022 CARB SCOPING PLAN
On December 15, 2022, CARB adopted the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality
(2022 Scoping Plan) (39). The 2022 Scoping Plan builds on the 2017 Scoping Plan as well as the
requirements set forth by AB 1279, which directs the state to become carbon neutral no later
than 2045. To achieve this statutory objective, the 2022 Scoping Plan lays out how California can
reduce GHG emissions by 85% below 1990 levels and achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. The
Scoping Plan scenario to do this is to “deploy a broad portfolio of existing and emerging fossil fuel
alternatives and clean technologies, and align with statutes, Executive Orders, Board direction,
and direction from the governor.” The 2022 Scoping Plan sets one of the most aggressive
approaches to reach carbon neutrality in the world. Unlike the 2017 Scoping Plan, CARB no
longer includes a numeric per capita threshold and instead advocates for compliance with a local
GHG reduction strategy (CAP) consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15183.5.
The key elements of the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan focus on transportation - the regulations that
will impact this sector are adopted and enforced by CARB on vehicle manufacturers and outside
the jurisdiction and control of local governments. As stated in the Plan’s executive summary:
“The major element of this unprecedented transformation is the aggressive
reduction of fossil fuels wherever they are currently used in California, building on
and accelerating carbon reduction programs that have been in place for a decade
and a half. That means rapidly moving to zero-emission transportation;
electrifying the cars, buses, trains, and trucks that now constitute California’s
single largest source of planet-warming pollution.”
“[A]pproval of this plan catalyzes a number of efforts, including the development
of new regulations as well as amendments to strengthen regulations and
programs already in place, not just at CARB but across state agencies.”
Under the 2022 Scoping Plan, the State will lead efforts to meet the 2045 carbon neutrality goal
through implementation of the following objectives:
• Reimagine roadway projects that increase VMT in a way that meets community needs and
reduces the need to drive.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
31
• Double local transit capacity and service frequencies by 2030.
• Complete the High-Speed Rail (HSR) System and other elements of the intercity rail network by
2040.
• Expand and complete planned networks of high-quality active transportation infrastructure.
• Increase availability and affordability of bikes, e-bikes, scooters, and other alternatives to light-
duty vehicles, prioritizing needs of underserved communities.
• Shift revenue generation for transportation projects away from the gas tax into more durable
sources by 2030.
• Authorize and implement roadway pricing strategies and reallocate revenues to equitably
improve transit, bicycling, and other sustainable transportation choices.
• Prioritize addressing key transit bottlenecks and other infrastructure investments to improve
transit operational efficiency over investments that increase VMT.
• Develop and implement a statewide transportation demand management (TDM) framework with
VMT mitigation requirements for large employers and large developments.
• Prevent uncontrolled growth of autonomous vehicle (AV) VMT, particularly zero-passenger miles.
• Channel new mobility services towards pooled use models, transit complementarity, and lower
VMT outcomes.
• Establish an integrated statewide system for trip planning, booking, payment, and user accounts
that enables efficient and equitable multimodal systems.
• Provide financial support for low-income and disadvantaged Californians’ use of transit and new
mobility services.
• Expand universal design features for new mobility services.
• Accelerate infill development in existing transportation-efficient places and deploy strategic
resources to create more transportation-efficient locations.
• Encourage alignment in land use, housing, transportation, and conservation planning in adopted
regional plans (RTP/SCS and RHNA) and local plans (e.g., general plans, zoning, and local
transportation plans).
• Accelerate production of affordable housing in forms and locations that reduce VMT and
affirmatively further fair housing policy objectives.
• Reduce or eliminate parking requirements (and/or enact parking maximums, as appropriate) and
promote redevelopment of excess parking, especially in infill locations.
• Preserve and protect existing affordable housing stock and protect existing residents and
businesses from displacement and climate risk.
Included in the 2022 Scoping Plan is a set of Local Actions (Appendix D to the 2022 Scoping Plan)
aimed at providing local jurisdictions with tools to reduce GHGs and assist the state in meeting
the ambitious targets set forth in the 2022 Scoping Plan. Appendix D to the 2022 Scoping Plan
includes a section on evaluating plan-level and project-level alignment with the State’s Climate
Goals in CEQA GHG analyses. In this section, CARB identifies several recommendations and
strategies that should be considered for new development in order to determine consistency
with the 2022 Scoping Plan. Notably, this section is focused on Residential and Mixed-Use
Projects, in fact CARB states in Appendix D (page 4): “…focuses primarily on climate action plans
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
32
(CAPs) and local authority over new residential development. It does not address other land use
types (e.g., industrial) or air permitting.”
Additionally on Page 21 in Appendix D, CARB states: “The recommendations outlined in this
section apply only to residential and mixed-use development project types. California currently
faces both a housing crisis and a climate crisis, which necessitates prioritizing recommendations
for residential projects to address the housing crisis in a manner that simultaneously supports
the State’s GHG and regional air quality goals. CARB plans to continue to explore new approaches
for other land use types in the future.” As such, it would be inappropriate to apply the
requirements contained in Appendix D of the 2022 Scoping Plan to any land use types other than
residential or mixed-use residential development.
2.7.3.2 EXECUTIVE ORDERS RELATED TO GHG EMISSIONS
California’s Executive Branch has taken several actions to reduce GHGs through the use of
Executive Orders. Although not regulatory, they set the tone for the state and guide the actions
of state agencies.
EXECUTIVE ORDER S-3-05
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced on June 1, 2005, through Executive
Order S-3-05, the following reduction targets for GHG emissions:
• By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels.
• By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels.
• By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80% below 1990 levels.
The 2050 reduction goal represents what some scientists believe is necessary to reach levels that
would stabilize the climate. The 2020 goal was established to be a mid-term target. Because this
is an executive order, the goals are not legally enforceable for local governments or the private
sector.
EXECUTIVE ORDER S-01-07 (LCFS)
Governor Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-01-07 on January 18, 2007. The order
mandates that a statewide goal shall be established to reduce the carbon intensity of California’s
transportation fuels by at least 10% by 2020. CARB adopted the LCFS on April 23, 2009.
After a series of legal changes, in order to address the Court ruling, CARB was required to bring a
new LCFS regulation to the Board for consideration in February 2015. The proposed LCFS
regulation was required to contain revisions to the 2010 LCFS as well as new provisions designed
to foster investments in the production of the low-carbon intensity fuels, offer additional
flexibility to regulated parties, update critical technical information, simplify and streamline
program operations, and enhance enforcement. On November 16, 2015, the Office of
Administrative Law (OAL) approved the Final Rulemaking Package. The new LCFS regulation
became effective on January 1, 2016.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
33
In 2018, CARB approved amendments to the regulation, which included strengthening the carbon
intensity benchmarks through 2030 in compliance with the SB 32 GHG emissions reduction target
for 2030. The amendments included crediting opportunities to promote zero emission vehicle
adoption, alternative jet fuel, carbon capture and sequestration, and advanced technologies to
achieve deep decarbonization in the transportation sector (40).
EXECUTIVE ORDER S-13-08
Executive Order S-13-08 states that “climate change in California during the next century is
expected to shift precipitation patterns, accelerate sea level rise and increase temperatures,
thereby posing a serious threat to California’s economy, to the health and welfare of its
population and to its natural resources.” Pursuant to the requirements in the Order, the 2009
California Climate Adaptation Strategy (CNRA 2009) was adopted, which is the “…first statewide,
multi-sector, region-specific, and information-based climate change adaptation strategy in the
United States.” Objectives include analyzing risks of climate change in California, identifying, and
exploring strategies to adapt to climate change, and specifying a direction for future research.
EXECUTIVE ORDER B-30-15
On April 29, 2015, Governor Brown issued an executive order to establish a California GHG
reduction target of 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. The Governor’s executive order aligned
California’s GHG reduction targets with those of leading international governments ahead of the
U.N. Climate Change Conference in Paris late 2015. The Order sets a new interim statewide GHG
emission reduction target to reduce GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 in order
to ensure California meets its target of reducing GHG emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050
and directs CARB to update the 2017 Scoping Plan to express the 2030 target in terms of
MMTCO2e. The Order also requires the state’s climate adaptation plan to be updated every three
years, and for the State to continue its climate change research program, among other provisions.
As with Executive Order S-3-05, this Order is not legally enforceable to local governments and
the private sector. Legislation that would update AB 32 to make post 2020 targets and
requirements a mandate is in process in the State Legislature.
EXECUTIVE ORDER B-55-18 AND SB 100
SB 100 and Executive Order B-55-18 were signed by Governor Brown on September 10, 2018.
Under the existing RPS, 25% of retail sales of electricity are required to be from renewable
sources by December 31, 2016, 33% by December 31, 2020, 40% by December 31, 2024, 45% by
December 31, 2027, and 50% by December 31, 2030. SB 100 raises California’s RPS requirement
to 50% renewable resources target by December 31, 2026, and to achieve a 60% target by
December 31, 2030. SB 100 also requires that retail sellers and local publicly owned electric
utilities procure a minimum quantity of electricity products from eligible renewable energy
resources so that the total kilowatt hours (kWh) of those products sold to their retail end-use
customers achieve 44% of retail sales by December 31, 2024, 52% by December 31, 2027, and
60% by December 31, 2030. In addition to targets under AB 32 and SB 32, Executive Order B-55-
18 establishes a carbon neutrality goal for the state of California by 2045; and sets a goal to
maintain net negative emissions thereafter. The Executive Order directs the California Natural
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
34
Resources Agency (CNRA), California EPA (CalEPA), the California Department of Food and
Agriculture (CDFA), and CARB to include sequestration targets in the Natural and Working Lands
Climate Change Implementation Plan consistent with the carbon neutrality goal.
2.7.3.3 CALIFORNIA REGULATIONS AND BUILDING CODES
California has a long history of adopting regulations to improve energy efficiency in new and
remodeled buildings. These regulations have kept California’s energy consumption relatively flat
even with rapid population growth.
TITLE 20 CCR SECTIONS 1601 ET SEQ. – APPLIANCE EFFICIENCY REGULATIONS
The Appliance Efficiency Regulations regulate the sale of appliances in California. The Appliance
Efficiency Regulations include standards for both federally regulated appliances and non-
federally regulated appliances. Twenty-three categories of appliances are included in the scope
of these regulations. The standards within these regulations apply to appliances that are sold or
offered for sale in California, except those sold wholesale in California for final retail sale outside
the state and those designed and sold exclusively for use in recreational vehicles (RV) or other
mobile equipment (CEC 2012).
TITLE 24 ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS AND CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS
California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24 Part 6: The California Energy Code was first adopted
in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption.
The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new
energy efficient technologies and methods. CCR, Title 24, Part 11: California Green Building
Standards Code (CALGreen) is a comprehensive and uniform regulatory code for all residential,
commercial, and school buildings that went in effect on August 1, 2009, and is administered by
the California Building Standards Commission.
CALGreen is updated on a regular basis, with the most recent approved update consisting of the
2022 California Green Building Code Standards that became effective on January 1, 2023. The
CEC anticipates that the 2022 energy code will provide $1.5 billion in consumer benefits and
reduce GHG emissions by 10 million metric tons (41). The Project would be required to comply
with the applicable standards in place at the time plan check submittals are made. These require,
among other items (42):
NONRESIDENTIAL MANDATORY MEASURES
• Short-term bicycle parking. If the new project or an additional alteration is anticipated to
generate visitor traffic, provide permanently anchored bicycle racks within 200 feet of the
visitors’ entrance, readily visible to passers-by, for 5% of new visitor motorized vehicle
parking spaces being added, with a minimum of one two-bike capacity rack
(5.106.4.1.1).
• Long-term bicycle parking. For new buildings with tenant spaces that have 10 or more
tenant-occupants, provide secure bicycle parking for 5% of the tenant-occupant vehicular
parking spaces with a minimum of one bicycle parking facility (5.106.4.1.2).
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
35
• EV charging stations. New construction shall facilitate the future installation of EV supply
equipment. The compliance requires empty raceways for future conduit and documentation that
the electrical system has adequate capacity for the future load. The number of spaces to be
provided for is contained in Table 5.106. 5.3.3 (5.106.5.3). Additionally, Table 5.106.5.4.1
specifies requirements for the installation of raceway conduit and panel power requirements for
medium- and heavy-duty EV supply equipment for warehouses, grocery stores, and retail stores.
• Outdoor light pollution reduction. Outdoor lighting systems shall be designed to meet the
backlight, uplight and glare ratings per Table 5.106.8 (5.106.8).
• Construction waste management. Recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65% of
the nonhazardous construction and demolition waste in accordance with Section
5.408.1.1. 5.405.1.2, or 5.408.1.3; or meet a local construction and demolition waste
management ordinance, whichever is more stringent (5.408.1).
• Excavated soil and land clearing debris. 100% of trees, stumps, rocks and associated
vegetation and soils resulting primarily from land clearing shall be reuse or recycled. For a
phased project, such material may be stockpiled on site until the storage site is developed
(5.408.3).
• Recycling by Occupants. Provide readily accessible areas that serve the entire building and are
identified for the depositing, storage, and collection of non-hazardous materials for
recycling, including (at a minimum) paper, corrugated cardboard, glass, plastics, organic
waste, and metals or meet a lawfully enacted local recycling ordinance, if more restrictive
(5.410.1).
• Water conserving plumbing fixtures and fittings. Plumbing fixtures (water closets and
urinals) and fittings (faucets and showerheads) shall comply with the following:
o Water Closets. The effective flush volume of all water closets shall not exceed
1.28 gallons per flush (5.303.3.1)
o Urinals. The effective flush volume of wall-mounted urinals shall not exceed
0.125 gallons per flush (5.303.3.2.1). The effective flush volume of floor- mounted or
other urinals shall not exceed 0.5 gallons per flush (5.303.3.2.2).
o Showerheads. Single showerheads shall have a minimum flow rate of not more than 1.8
gallons per minute and 80 psi (5.303.3.3.1). When a shower is served by more than one
showerhead, the combine flow rate of all showerheads and/or other shower outlets
controlled by a single valve shall not exceed 1.8 gallons per minute at 80 psi (5.303.3.3.2).
o Faucets and fountains. Nonresidential lavatory faucets shall have a maximum flow
rate of not more than 0.5 gallons per minute at 60 psi (5.303.3.4.1). Kitchen faucets shall
have a maximum flow rate of not more than 1.8 gallons per minute of 60 psi
(5.303.3.4.2). Wash fountains shall have a maximum flow rate of not more than 1.8
gallons per minute (5.303.3.4.3). Metering faucets shall not deliver more than 0.20
gallons per cycle (5.303.3.4.4). Metering faucets for wash fountains shall have a
maximum flow rate not more than 0.20 gallons per cycle (5.303.3.4.5).
• Outdoor potable water uses in landscaped areas. Nonresidential developments shall comply
with a local water efficient landscape ordinance or the current California Department of
Water Resources’ Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), whichever is more
stringent (5.304.1).
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
36
• Water meters. Separate submeters or metering devices shall be installed for new
buildings or additions in excess of 50,000 sf or for excess consumption where any tenant
within a new building or within an addition that is project to consume more than 1,000
gallons per day (GPD) (5.303.1.1 and 5.303.1.2).
• Outdoor water uses in rehabilitated landscape projects equal or greater than 2,500 sf.
Rehabilitated landscape projects with an aggregate landscape area equal to or greater than
2,500 sf requiring a building or landscape permit (5.304.3).
• Commissioning. For new buildings 10,000 sf and over, building commissioning shall be
included in the design and construction processes of the building project to verify that the
building systems and components meet the owner’s or owner representative’s project
requirements (5.410.2).
CARB REFRIGERANT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
CARB adopted a regulation in 2009 to reduce refrigerant GHG emissions from stationary sources
through refrigerant leak detection and monitoring, leak repair, system retirement and
retrofitting, reporting and recordkeeping, and proper refrigerant cylinder use, sale, and disposal.
The regulation is set forth in sections 95380 to 95398 of Title 17, CCR. The rules implementing
the regulation establish a limit on statewide GHG emissions from stationary facilities with
refrigeration systems with more than 50 pounds of a high GWP refrigerant. The refrigerant
management program is designed to (1) reduce emissions of high-GWP GHG refrigerants from
leaky stationary, non-residential refrigeration equipment; (2) reduce emissions from the
installation and servicing of refrigeration and air-conditioning appliances using high-GWP
refrigerants; and (3) verify GHG emission reductions.
SB 97 AND THE CEQA GUIDELINES UPDATE
Passed in August 2007, SB 97 added Section 21083.05 to the Public Resources Code. The code
states “(a) On or before July 1, 2009, the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) shall prepare,
develop, and transmit to the Resources Agency guidelines for the mitigation of GHG emissions or
the effects of GHG emissions as required by this division, including, but not limited to, effects
associated with transportation or energy consumption. (b) On or before January 1, 2010, the
Resources Agency shall certify and adopt guidelines prepared and developed by the OPR
pursuant to subdivision (a).”
In 2012, Public Resources Code Section 21083.05 was amended to state:
“The Office of Planning and Research and the Natural Resources Agency shall
periodically update the guidelines for the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions
or the effects of greenhouse gas emissions as required by this division, including,
but not limited to, effects associated with transportation or energy consumption,
to incorporate new information or criteria established by the State Air Resources
Board pursuant to Division 25.5 (commencing with Section 38500) of the Health
and Safety Code.”
On December 28, 2018, the Natural Resources Agency announced the OAL approved the
amendments to the CEQA Guidelines for implementing CEQA. The CEQA Amendments provide
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
37
guidance to public agencies regarding the analysis and mitigation of the effects of GHG emissions
in CEQA documents. The CEQA Amendments fit within the existing CEQA framework by amending
existing CEQA Guidelines to reference climate change.
Section 15064.4 was added to the CEQA Guidelines and states that in determining the significance
of a project’s GHG emissions, the lead agency should focus its analysis on the reasonably
foreseeable incremental contribution of the project’s emissions to the effects of climate change.
A project’s incremental contribution may be cumulatively considerable even if it appears
relatively insignificant compared to statewide, national, or global emissions. The agency’s
analysis should consider a timeframe that is appropriate for the project. The agency’s analysis
also must reasonably reflect evolving scientific knowledge and state regulatory schemes.
Additionally, a lead agency may use a model or methodology to estimate GHG emissions resulting
from a project. The lead agency has discretion to select the model or methodology it considers
most appropriate to enable decision makers to intelligently take into account the project’s
incremental contribution to climate change. The lead agency must support its selection of a
model or methodology with substantial evidence. The lead agency should explain the limitations
of the particular model or methodology selected for use (43).
2.7.4 REGIONAL
The Project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is under the jurisdiction
of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).
SCAQMD
The SCAQMD is the agency responsible for air quality planning and regulation in the SCAB. The
SCAQMD addresses the impacts to climate change of projects subject to SCAQMD permit as a
lead agency if they are the only agency having discretionary approval for the project and acts as
a responsible agency when a land use agency must also approve discretionary permits for the
project. The SCAQMD acts as an expert commenting agency for impacts to air quality. This
expertise carries over to GHG emissions, so the agency helps local land use agencies through the
development of models and emission thresholds that can be used to address GHG emissions.
The SCAQMD has been evaluating GHG significance thresholds since April 2008. On December 5,
2008, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted an Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas Significance
Threshold of 10,000 MTCO2e per year for stationary source/industrial projects for which the
SCAQMD is the lead agency. The SCAQMD has continued to consider the adoption of significance
thresholds for projects where the SCAQMD is not the lead agency. The most recent proposal
issued in September 2010 uses the following tiered approach to evaluate potential GHG impacts
from various uses:
• Tier 1 consists of evaluating whether or not the project qualifies for any applicable exemption
under CEQA.
• Tier 2 consists of determining whether the project is consistent with a locally adopted GHG
reduction plan. If a project is consistent with a qualifying locally adopted GHG reduction plan, it
does not have significant GHG emissions.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
38
• Tier 3 consists of screening thresholds, which the lead agency can choose, but must be consistent
with all projects within its jurisdiction. A project’s construction emissions are averaged over 30
years and are added to the project’s operational emissions. If a project’s emissions are below one
of the following screening thresholds, then the project is less than significant:
o Residential and commercial land use: 3,000 MTCO2e/yr
o Industrial land use: 10,000 MTCO2e/yr
o Option 1: Based on land use type: residential: 3,500 MTCO2e/yr; commercial: 1,400
MTCO2e/yr; or mixed use: 3,000 MTCO2e/yr
o Option 2: All non-industrial land uses: 3,000 MTCO2e/yr
• Tier 4 has the following options:
o Option 1: Percent emission reduction target; this percentage is currently undefined.
o Option 2: Early implementation of applicable AB 32 Scoping Plan measures
o Option 3: 2020 target for service populations (SP), which includes residents and employees:
4.8 MTCO2e per SP per year for projects and 6.6 MTCO2e per SP per year for plans;
o Option 3, 2035 target: 3.0 MTCO2e per SP per year for projects and 4.1 MTCO2e per SP per
year for plans
• Tier 5 involves mitigation offsets to achieve target significance threshold.
The SCAQMD’s draft thresholds used the Executive Order S-3-05-year 2050 goal as the basis for
the Tier 3 screening level. Achieving the Executive Order’s objective would contribute to
worldwide efforts to cap CO2 concentrations at 450 ppm, thus stabilizing global climate.
SCAQMD Regulation XXVII, adopted in 2009 includes the following rules:
• Rule 2700 defines terms and post global warming potentials.
• Rule 2701, SoCal Climate Solutions Exchange, establishes a voluntary program to encourage,
quantify, and certify voluntary, high quality certified GHG emission reductions in the SCAQMD.
• Rule 2702, GHG Reduction Program created a program to produce GHG emission reductions
within the SCAQMD. The SCAQMD would fund projects through contracts in response to requests
for proposals or purchase reductions from other parties.
CONNECT SOCAL 2024-2050 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN/SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY
On April 4, 2024, Southern California Association of Governments’ (SCAG) Regional Council
adopted the Connect SoCal 2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities
Strategy (RTP/SCS). The SCAG 2024 Connect SoCal refers to the Southern California Association
of Governments' (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
(RTP/SCS) for the year 2024. It outlines a comprehensive vision and plan for transportation and
sustainable growth across Southern California, addressing issues such as transportation
infrastructure, land use, housing, and environmental sustainability. The plan aims to guide
development and policy decisions to support a more connected, efficient, and sustainable future
for the region (44).
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
39
2.7.5 LOCAL
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ENERGY ACTION PLAN
The City of Newport Beach’s Energy Action Plan outlines strategies to enhance energy efficiency,
promote renewable energy, and reduce GHG emissions. By implementing energy efficiency
programs in residential and commercial buildings, encouraging renewable energy sources like
solar, and setting long-term sustainability goals, the plan aims to mitigate climate change
impacts. It also emphasizes community engagement and collaboration with local organizations
to foster a culture of energy conservation. Ultimately, the plan directly contributes to reducing
GHG emissions, improving air quality, and promoting a healthier, more sustainable environment
for residents.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
40
This page intentionally left blank
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
41
3 EXISTING PROJECT SITE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
The Project site is currently occupied by a 38-bay partially covered driving range, a putting green,
three holes of the golf course (holes 1, 2, and 9), a pro shop, a restaurant with a full bar, and a
large surface parking lot. The estimated operation-source emissions from the existing
development are summarized on Table 3-1. Detailed operation model outputs are presented in
Appendix 3.1.
TABLE 3-1: GHG EMISSIONS FROM EXISTING DEVELOPMENT
Emission Source Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2 CH4 N2O Refrigerants Total CO2e
Mobile Source 1,742.00 0.08 0.07 2.43 1,768.00
Area Source 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy Source1 62.85 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 63.07
Water Usage 4.87 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 4.90
Waste 1.04 0.10 0.00 0.00 3.62
Refrigeration 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total CO2e (All Sources) 1,839.59
Source: CalEEMod output, See Appendix 3.1 for detailed model outputs.
1Energy Source emissions are based on estimated natural gas usage of 900,000 kBtu per year and 96,160 kWh per year for the existing facility.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
42
This page intentionally left blank
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
43
4 PROJECT GHG IMPACT
4.1 INTRODUCTION
The Project has been evaluated to determine if it will result in a significant GHG impact. The
significance of these potential impacts is described in the following sections.
4.2 STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The criteria used to determine the significance of potential Project-related GHG impacts are
taken from the Initial Study Checklist in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California
Code of Regulations §§15000, et seq.). Based on these thresholds, a project would result in a
significant impact related to GHG if it would (45):
• Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
• Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of GHGs?
The evaluation of an impact under CEQA requires measuring data from a project against both
existing conditions and a “threshold of significance.” For establishing significance thresholds, the
Office of Planning and Research’s amendments to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(c) state
“[w]hen adopting thresholds of significance, a lead agency may consider thresholds of
significance previously adopted or recommended by other public agencies, or recommended by
experts, provided the decision of the lead agency to adopt such thresholds is supported by
substantial evidence.”
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4(a) further states, “. . . A lead agency shall have discretion to
determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to: (1) Use a model or methodology to
quantify greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project, and which model or methodology to
use . . .; or (2) Rely on a qualitative analysis or performance-based standards.”
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 provides that a lead agency should consider the following
factors, among others, in assessing the significance of impacts from greenhouse gas emissions:
• Consideration #1: The extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas
emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting.
• Consideration #2: Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead
agency determines applies to the project.
• Consideration #3: The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements
adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of
greenhouse gas emissions. Such regulations or requirements must be adopted by the relevant
public agency through a public review process and must reduce or mitigate the project’s
incremental contribution of greenhouse gas emissions. In determining the significance of
impacts, the lead agency may consider a project’s consistency with the State’s long-term climate
goals or strategies, provided that substantial evidence supports the agency’s analysis of how those
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
44
goals or strategies address the project’s incremental contribution to climate change and its
conclusion that the project’s incremental contribution is not cumulatively considerable.
4.2.1 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The City of Newport Beach has not adopted its own numeric threshold of significance for
determining impacts concerning GHG emissions. A screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e/yr to
determine if additional analysis is required is an acceptable approach. This approach is a widely
accepted screening threshold used by the City of Newport Beach and numerous cities in the
South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) and is based on the SCAQMD staff’s proposed GHG screening
threshold for stationary source emissions for non-industrial projects, as described in the
SCAQMD’s Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans
(“SCAQMD Interim GHG Threshold”). The SCAQMD Interim GHG Threshold identifies a screening
threshold to determine whether additional analysis is required (46). As noted by the SCAQMD:
“…the…screening level for stationary sources is based on an emission capture rate
of 90% for all new or modified projects...the policy objective of [SCAQMD’s]
recommended interim GHG significance threshold proposal is to achieve an
emission capture rate of 90% of all new or modified stationary source projects. A
GHG significance threshold based on a 90% emission capture rate may be more
appropriate to address the long-term adverse impacts associated with global
climate change because most projects will be required to implement GHG
reduction measures. Further, a 90% emission capture rate sets the emission
threshold low enough to capture a substantial fraction of future stationary source
projects that will be constructed to accommodate future statewide population and
economic growth, while setting the emission threshold high enough to exclude
small projects that will in aggregate contribute a relatively small fraction of the
cumulative statewide GHG emissions. This assertion is based on the fact that
[SCAQMD] staff estimates that these GHG emissions would account for slightly less
than 1% of future 2050 statewide GHG emissions target (85 [MMTCO2e/yr]). In
addition, these small projects may be subject to future applicable GHG control
regulations that would further reduce their overall future contribution to the
statewide GHG inventory. Finally, these small sources are already subject to [Best
Available Control Technology] (BACT) for criteria pollutants and are more likely to
be single-permit facilities, so they are more likely to have few opportunities readily
available to reduce GHG emissions from other parts of their facility.”
Thus, and based on guidance from the SCAQMD, if a non-industrial project would emit GHGs less
than 3,000 MTCO2e/yr, the project is not considered a substantial GHG emitter and the GHG
impact is less than significant, requiring no additional analysis and no mitigation. Conversely, if
a non-industrial project would emit GHGs in excess of 3,000 MTCO2e/yr, then the project could
be considered a substantial GHG emitter, requiring additional analysis and potential
mitigation. As previously discussed, a screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e/yr is an acceptable
approach to determine if additional analysis is required and is therefore applied for this Project.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
45
4.3 MODELS EMPLOYED TO ANALYZE GHGS
4.3.1 CALIFORNIA EMISSIONS ESTIMATOR MODEL (CALEEMOD)
The California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) in conjunction with other
California air districts, including SCAQMD, released CalEEMod 2022 in May 2022. CalEEMod
periodically releases updates, as such the latest version available at the time of this report has
been utilized in this analysis. The purpose of this model is to calculate construction-source and
operational-source criteria pollutants and GHG emissions from direct and indirect sources; and
quantify applicable air quality and GHG reductions achieved from mitigation measures (47).
Accordingly, the latest version of CalEEMod has been used for this Project to determine GHG
emissions. Output from the model runs for construction and operational activity are provided in
Appendix 4.1. CalEEMod includes GHG emissions from the following source categories:
construction, area, energy, mobile, waste, water, and refrigerants.
4.4 LIFE-CYCLE ANALYSIS NOT REQUIRED
A full life‐cycle analysis (LCA) for construction and operational activity is not included in this
analysis due to the lack of consensus guidance on LCA methodology at this time (48). Life‐cycle
analysis (i.e., assessing economy‐wide GHG emissions from the processes in manufacturing and
transporting all raw materials used in the Project development, infrastructure, and on-going
operations) depends on emission factors or econometric factors that are not well established for
all processes. At this time, an LCA would be extremely speculative and thus has not been
prepared.
Additionally, the SCAQMD recommends analyzing direct and indirect project GHG emissions
generated within California and not life-cycle emissions because the life-cycle effects from a
project could occur outside of California, might not be very well understood, or documented, and
would be challenging to mitigate (49). Additionally, the science to calculate life cycle emissions is
not yet established or well defined; therefore, the SCAQMD has not recommended, and is not
requiring, life-cycle emissions analysis.
4.5 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Project construction activities would generate CO2 and CH4 emissions. The Surf Farm Air Quality
Impact Analysis (AQIA) report contains detailed information regarding Project construction
activities (50). As discussed in the AQIA, construction-related emissions are expected from the
following activities:
• Demolition
• Site Preparation
• Grading
• Building Construction
• Paving
• Architectural Coating
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
46
4.5.1 CONSTRUCTION DURATION
Construction is expected to begin in April 2026 and conclude in October 2027, lasting
approximately eighteen months. The construction schedule utilized in the analysis, shown in
Table 4-1, represents a conservative analysis scenario should construction occur any time after
the respective days since emission factors for construction decrease as time passes and the
analysis year increases due to emission regulations becoming more stringent 3. The duration of
construction activity and associated equipment represents a reasonable approximation of the
expected construction fleet as required per CEQA Guidelines (51).
TABLE 4-1: CONSTRUCTION DURATION
Phase Name Start Date End Date Days
Demolition 04/1/2026 04/28/2026 20
Site Preparation 04/29/2026 06/09/2026 30
Grading 06/10/2026 08/18/2026 50
Building Construction 08/19/2026 10/12/2027 300
Paving 07/21/2027 10/12/2027 60
Architectural Coating 08/18/2027 10/12/2027 40
4.5.2 CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
Consistent with industry standards and typical construction practices, each piece of equipment
listed in Table 4-2 is assumed to operate up to a total of eight (8) hours per day, or more than
two-thirds of the period during which construction activities are allowed pursuant to the City
code. It should be noted that the Project Applicant has confirmed that the equipment list is
reasonable for the Project’s construction.
TABLE 4-2: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ASSUMPTIONS (1 OF 2)
3 As shown in the CalEEMod User’s Guide Version 2022, Appendix G “Table G-11. Statewide Average Annual Offoad Equipment Emission
Factors” as the analysis year increases, emission factors for the same equipment pieces decrease due to the natural turnover of older
equipment being replaced by newer less polluting equipment and new regulatory requirements.
Activity Equipment Amount Hours Per Day
Demolition
Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8
Excavators 2 8
Rubber Tired Loader 1 8
Site Preparation Crawler Tractors 1 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
47
TABLE 4-2: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ASSUMPTIONS (2 OF 2)
4.5.3 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS SUMMARY
For construction phase Project emissions, GHGs are quantified and amortized over the life of the
Project. To amortize the emissions over the life of the Project, the SCAQMD recommends
calculating the total GHG emissions for the construction activities, dividing it by a 30-year Project
life then adding that number to the annual operational phase GHG emissions (52). As such,
construction emissions were amortized over a 30-year period and added to the annual
operational phase GHG emissions. The amortized construction emissions are presented in Table
4-3.
TABLE 4-3: AMORTIZED ANNUAL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Year Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2 CH4 N2O Refrigerants Total CO2e 4
2026 418.88 0.02 0.01 0.06 421.20
2027 354.19 0.01 0.01 0.07 356.64
Total GHG Emissions 773.07 0.03 0.01 0.13 777.84
Amortized Construction Emissions 25.77 1.01E-03 0.00 0.00 25.93
Source: CalEEMod annual construction-source emissions are presented in Appendix 4.1.
4 CalEEMod reports the most common GHGs emitted which include CO2, CH4, N2O, and Refrigerants. These GHGs are then converted into the
CO2e by multiplying the individual GHG by the GWP.
Activity Equipment Amount Hours Per Day
Grading
Wheel Loaders 2 8
Excavators 2 8
Graders 4 8
Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8
Scrapers 2 8
Building Construction
Cranes 1 8
Forklifts 3 8
Generator Sets 2 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8
Welders 1 8
Paving
Pavers 2 8
Paving Equipment 2 8
Rollers 2 8
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 8
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
48
4.6 OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Operational activities associated with the Project would result in emissions of CO2, CH4, N2O, and
Refrigerant emissions from the following primary sources:
• Mobile Source Emissions
• Area Source Emissions
• Energy Source Emissions
• Water Supply, Treatment, and Distribution
• Solid Waste
• Refrigerants
• Sequestration
4.6.1 MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS
GHG emissions would result from vehicle trips generated by the Project, including employee and
visitor trips to and from the site associated with the proposed uses. Trip characteristics available
from the Surf Farm Traffic Analysis were utilized in this analysis (53).
4.6.2 AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT
Landscape maintenance equipment would generate emissions from fuel combustion and
evaporation of unburned fuel. Equipment in this category would include lawnmowers,
shedders/grinders, blowers, trimmers, chain saws, and hedge trimmers used to maintain the
landscaping of the Project. It should be noted that on October 9, 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom
signed AB 1346. The bill aims to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered equipment under 25 gross
horsepower (known as small off-road engines [SOREs]) by January 1, 2024, which is now effective.
For purposes of analysis, the emissions associated with landscape maintenance equipment were
calculated based on assumptions provided in CalEEMod.
4.6.3 ENERGY SOURCE EMISSIONS
COMBUSTION EMISSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH NATURAL GAS AND ELECTRICITY
GHGs are emitted from buildings as a result of activities for which electricity and natural gas are
typically used as energy sources. Combustion of any type of fuel emits CO2 and other GHGs
directly into the atmosphere; these emissions are considered direct emissions associated with a
building; the building energy use emissions do not include street lighting.5 GHGs are also emitted
during the generation of electricity from fossil fuels; these emissions are considered to be indirect
emissions. The Project is expected to consume 12,031,284 kWh of electricity per year. The Project
would include the installation of solar panels on building tops, on the top of the wave making
5 The CalEEMod emissions inventory model does not include indirect emission related to street lighting. Indirect emissions related to street
lighting are expected to be negligible and cannot be accurately quantified at this time as there is insufficient information as to the number and
type of street lighting that would occur.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
49
equipment yard, and solar trellises would be installed over portions of both parking areas to
produce renewable energy to power the proposed onsite operations. Based on data
provided by the applicant’s solar contractor, annual system production is estimated at
2,375,568 kWh. Additionally, it is estimated that the Project would consume 12,158,880 kBtu
of natural gas per year for kitchen and water heating purposes. GHG emissions associated
with natural gas usage was calculated using CalEEMod.
4.6.4 WATER SUPPLY, TREATMENT, AND DISTRIBUTION
Indirect GHG emissions result from the production of electricity used to convey, treat, and
distribute water and wastewater. The amount of electricity required to convey, treat, and
distribute water depends on the volume of water as well as the sources of the water. The Project
is expected to consume 23 million gallons of water per year.
4.6.5 SOLID WASTE
The proposed land uses would result in the generation and disposal of solid waste. A percentage
of this waste would be diverted from landfills by a variety of means, such as reducing the amount
of waste generated, recycling, and/or composting. The remainder of the waste not diverted
would be disposed of at a landfill. GHG emissions from landfills are associated with the anaerobic
breakdown of material. GHG emissions associated with the disposal of solid waste associated
with the proposed Project were calculated by CalEEMod using default parameters.
4.6.6 REFRIGERANTS
Air conditioning (A/C) and refrigeration equipment associated with the buildings are anticipated
to generate GHG emissions. CalEEMod automatically generates a default A/C and refrigeration
equipment inventory for each project land use subtype based on industry data from the USEPA
(2016b). CalEEMod quantifies refrigerant emissions from leaks during regular operation and
routine servicing over the equipment lifetime and then derives average annual emissions from
the lifetime estimate. Note that CalEEMod does not quantify emissions from the disposal of
refrigeration and A/C equipment at the end of its lifetime. Per 17 CCR 95371, new facilities with
refrigeration equipment containing more than 50 pounds of refrigerant are prohibited from
utilizing refrigerants with a GWP of 150 or greater as of January 1, 2022. Additionally, beginning
January 1, 2025, all new air conditioning equipment may not use refrigerants with a GWP of 750
or greater. GHG emissions associated with refrigerants were calculated by CalEEMod using
default parameters.
4.6.7 SEQUESTRATION
The Project involves both the removal of existing trees and the addition of new ones, which may
affect carbon sequestration at the site. Mature trees store substantial carbon, and their removal
can lead to immediate emissions and reduced sequestration capacity. Conversely, while young
trees initially sequester less carbon, they can contribute significantly over time as they grow.
Sequestration associated with the Project was calculated by CalEEMod using the United States
Forest Service (USFS) i-Tree Planting tool.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
50
4.6.8 EMISSIONS SUMMARY
IMPACTS WITHOUT MITIGATION
The estimated Project-related GHG emissions are summarized in Table 4-4. Detailed operation
model outputs for the Project are presented in Appendix 4.1. As shown in Table 4-4, construction
and operation of the Project would generate approximately 2,433.05 MTCO2e/yr.
TABLE 4-4: PROJECT GHG EMISSIONS (WITHOUT MITIGATION)
Emission Source Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2 CH4 N2O Refrigerants Total CO2e
Annual construction-related emissions
amortized over 30 years 25.77 1.00E-03 0.00 0.00 25.93
Mobile Source 1,546.00 0.07 0.06 2.15 1,568.00
Area Source 1.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 1.62
Energy Source 2,161.41 0.20 0.02 0.00 2,172.03
Water Usage Source 19.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 19.30
Waste Source 13.50 1.35 0.00 0.00 47.20
Refrigeration Source 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
Sequestration -0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.45
Project CO2e (All Sources) 3,833.64
Holes to Remain1 439.00
Total CO2e (All Sources) 4,272.64
Existing -1,839.59
Net Emissions (Proposed – Existing) 2,433.05
Source: CalEEMod output, See Appendix 4.1 for detailed model outputs.
1 Per the Trip Generation Assessment for Surf Farm, the Project would retain 15 holes of the existing 18-hole Newport Beach Golf Course (53).
4.7 GHG EMISSIONS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.7.1 GHG IMPACT 1
Potential to generate direct or indirect GHG emissions that would result in a significant impact
on the environment.
The City of Newport Beach has not adopted its own numeric threshold of significance for
determining impacts with respect to GHG emissions. A screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e/yr
to determine if additional analysis is required is an acceptable approach. This approach is a widely
accepted screening threshold used by the City of Anaheim and numerous cities in the SCAB and
is based on the SCAQMD staff’s proposed GHG screening threshold for stationary source
emissions for non-industrial projects, as described in the SCAQMD’s Interim CEQA GHG
Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans (“SCAQMD Interim GHG
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
51
Threshold”). The SCAQMD Interim GHG Threshold identifies a screening threshold to determine
whether additional analysis is required (46).
As shown on Table 4-4, the Project would result in GHG emissions of 2,433.05 MTCO2e/yr. As
such, the Project’s total GHG emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD’s recommended
threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e/yr if it were applied. Thus, the Project would result in a less than
significant impact with regard to GHG emissions and no mitigation is required.
4.7.2 GHG IMPACT 2
Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose
of reducing the emissions of GHGs?
As previously stated, pursuant to Section 15604.4 of the CEQA Guidelines, a lead agency may rely
on qualitative analysis or performance-based standards to determine the significance of impacts
from GHG emissions (43). As such, the Project’s consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan is
discussed below. It should be noted that the Project’s consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan
also satisfies consistency with AB 32 since the 2022 Scoping Plan is based on the overall targets
established by AB 32 and SB 32. Consistency with the 2008 and 2017 Scoping Plan is not necessary
since both of these plans have been superseded by the 2022 Scoping Plan. For reasons outlined
herein, the proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact with respect to GHG
emissions for GHG Impact #2.
2022 SCOPING PLAN CONSISTENCY
The Project would not impede the State’s progress towards carbon neutrality by 2045 under the
2022 Scoping Plan. The Project would be required to comply with applicable current and future
regulatory requirements promulgated through the 2022 Scoping Plan. Some of the current
transportation sector policies the Project will comply with (through vehicle manufacturer
compliance) include: Advanced Clean Cars II, Advanced Clean Trucks, Advanced Clean Fleets, Zero
Emission Forklifts, Off-Road Zero-Emission Targeted Manufacturer Rule, Clean Off-Road Fleet
Recognition Program, Amendments to the In-use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation,
carbon pricing through the Cap-and-Trade Program, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard. As such,
the Project would be consistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan.
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ENERGY ACTION PLAN
The City’s Energy Action Plan is not directly applicable to the proposed Project because the goals
and policies in the plan are focused on energy efficiency and sustainability of City facilities.
However, because the Project is required to comply CALGreen and Title 24 standards, the Project
would not conflict with the community-wide energy use goals of the Energy Action Plan.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
52
This page intentionally left blank
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
53
4 REFERENCES
1. California Natural Resources Agency. 2023 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statute and
Guidelines. s.l. : Association of Environmental Professionals, 2023.
2. California Air Resources Board. Assembly Bill 32: Global Warming Solutions Act. [Online] 2006.
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/ab-32-global-warming-solutions-act-2006.
3. Air Resources Board. Sustainable Communities. [Online] 2008. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-
work/programs/sustainable-communities-climate-protection-program/about.
4. —. Clean Car Standards - Pavley, Assembly Bill 1493. [Online] September 24, 2009.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ccms/ccms.htm.
5. California Building Standards Commission. California Building Standards Code (Title 24, California Code
of Regulations). [Online] http://www.bsc.ca.gov/codes.aspx.
6. California Energy Commission. California Code of Regulations, TITLE 20, Division 2. [Online] September
3, 2013. https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2021-
07/Title%2020%20Updated%20July%2023%2C%202021.pdf.
7. California Air Resources Board. Title 17 - California Code of Regulation. [Online] 2010.
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-09/basics-notes.pdf.
8. California Energy Commission. SB 1368 Emission Performance Standards. [Online] September 29, 2006.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/emission_standards/.
9. —. Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS). [Online] 2002. http://www.energy.ca.gov/portfolio/.
10. California Legislative Information. Senate Bill No. 32. [Online] September 8, 2016.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB32.
11. National Environmental Education Foundation. The Principal Greenhouse Gases and Their Sources.
National Environmental Education Foundation. [Online] https://www.neefusa.org/weather-and-
climate/climate-change/principal-greenhouse-gases-and-their-sources#WaterVapor.
12. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth
Assessment Report. International Panel on Climate Change. 4, 2007.
13. The Carbon Cycle and Climate Change. Bennington, Bret J. 1, s.l. : Brooks/Cole. ISBN 1 3: 978-0-495-
73855-8.
14. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Carbon Dioxide. Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention. [Online] https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/npgd0103.html.
15. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Increase in atmospheric methane set another
record during 2021. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. [Online]
https://www.noaa.gov/news-release/increase-in-atmospheric-methane-set-another-record-during-
2021#:~:text=NOAA's%20preliminary%20analysis%20showed%20the,during%202020%20was%2015
.3%20ppb..
16. World Resources Institute. Climate Analysis Indicator Tool (CAIT). [Online] http://cait.wri.org.
17. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. CFCs and their substitutes in stratospheric ozone
depletion. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. [Online]
https://gml.noaa.gov/hats/about/cfc.html.
18. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Regulation for Reducting Sulfur Hexafluoride
Emissions from Gas Insulated Switchgear. Environmental Protection Agency. [Online] May 7, 2014.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
54
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-02/documents/mehl-arb-presentation-2014-
wkshp.pdf.
19. World Resources Institute. Nitrogen Trifluoride Now Required in GHG Protocol Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Inventory. [Online] May 22, 2013. https://www.wri.org/blog/2013/05/nitrogen-trifluoride-
now-required-ghg-protocol-greenhouse-gas-emissions-inventories.
20. National Center for Biotechnology Information. Nitrogen Trifluoride. PubChem Compound Database.
[Online] https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/24553 .
21. Barbara H. Allen-Diaz. Climate change affects us all. 2009.
22. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate Change 2021 The Physical Science Basis.
Climate Change 2021 The Physical Science Basis. [Online] https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-
assessment-report-working-group-i/.
23. United Nations. Annex 1. [Online] 2023. https://di.unfccc.int/time_series.
24. —. GHG Profiles - Non-Annex I. [Online] 2023. http://di.unfccc.int/ghg_profile_non_annex1.
25. California Air Resources Board. 2023 GHG Inventory. California Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory
2000-2021 Edition. [Online] https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-inventory-data.
26. Energy Information Administration . [Online] https://www.eia.gov/state/data.php?sid=US.
27. California Energy Commission. Our Changing Climate Assessing the Risks to California. 2006.
28. Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES). Outcomes of the U.N. Climate Change Conference.
Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES). [Online] 2015.
http://www.c2es.org/international/negotiations/cop21-paris/summary.
29. Agency, United States Environmental Protection. Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings
for Greenhouse Gases under the Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. United States Environmental
Protection Agency. [Online] 2020. https://www.epa.gov/climate-change/endangerment-and-cause-
or-contribute-findings-greenhouse-gases-under-section-202a.
30. Federal Register. Mid-Term Evaluation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Model Year 2022-
2025 Light-Duty Vehicles. [Online] 2018.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/04/13/2018-07364/mid-term-evaluation-of-
greenhouse-gas-emissions-standards-for-model-year-2022-2025-light-duty.
31. Administration, National Highway Traffic Safety. SAFE: The Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient 'SAFE'
Vehicle Rule. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. [Online] 2020.
https://www.nhtsa.gov/corporate-average-fuel-economy/safe.
32. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Corporate Average Fuel Economy. [Online]
https://www.nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/corporate-average-fuel-economy.
33. United States Department of Transportation. Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards for Model
Years 2024-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks. [Online]
https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2022-04/Final-Rule-Preamble_CAFE-MY-2024-
2026.pdf.
34. California Air Resources Board. California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan . [Online] 2017.
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017_es.pdf.
35. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. California's Policies Can Significantly Cut Greenhouse Gas
Emissions through 2030. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. [Online] January 22, 2015.
http://newscenter.lbl.gov/2015/01/22/californias-policies-can-significantly-cut-greenhouse-gas-
emissions-2030/.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
55
36. Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Modeling California policy impacts on
greenhouse gas emissions. [Online] 2015. https://eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/lbnl-
7008e.pdf.
37. California Air Resources Board. Legal Disclaimer & User's Notice. [Online] April 2019.
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2021-02/ct_reg_unofficial.pdf.
38. —. Climate Change Scoping Plan. [Online] 2014.
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2013_update/first_update_climate_change_scoping_plan.p
df.
39. —. 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality.
40. —. Low Carbon Fuel Standard. [Online] December 2019. https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lcfs.htm.
41. California Energy Commission. Energy Commission Adopts Updated Building Standards to Improve
Efficiency, Reduce Emissions from Homes and Businesses. [Online] August 11, 2021.
https://www.energy.ca.gov/news/2021-08/energy-commission-adopts-updated-building-standards-
improve-efficiency-reduce-0.
42. California Department of General Services. 2022 CALGreen Code. CALGreen. [Online]
https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CAGBC2022P1.
43. California Natural Resources Agency. 2023 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statute and
Guidelines. s.l. : Association of Environmental Professionals, 2023.
44. Southern California Association Governments. Connect SoCal 2024-2050 Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. [Online] 2024. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-
attachments/23-2987-connect-socal-2024-final-complete-040424.pdf?1714175547.
45. State of California. 2024 CEQA California Environmental Quality Act. 2024.
46. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for
Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans. [Online] http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-
thresholds/ghgboardsynopsis.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
47. ICF. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). California Air Pollution Control Officers
Association. [Online] August 2023. www.caleemod.com.
48. California Natural Resources Agency. Final Statement of Reasons for Regulatory Action, Amendments
to the State CEQA Guidelines Addressing Analysis and Mitigation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Pursuant to SB97. [Online] December 2009.
https://resources.ca.gov/CNRALegacyFiles/ceqa/docs/Final_Statement_of_Reasons.pdf.
49. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Minutes for the GHG CEQA Significance Threshold
Stakeholder Working Group #15. 2008.
50. Urban Crossroads, Inc. Surf Farm Air Quality Impact Analysis. 2024.
51. State of California. 2024 CEQA California Environmental Quality Act. 2024.
52. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Greenhouse Gas CEQA Significance Threshold
Stakeholder Working Group #13. [Powerpoint] Diamond Bar : s.n., 2009.
53. Gibson Transportation Consulting, Inc. Trip Generation Assessment for Surf Farm. 2024.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
56
This page intentionally left blank
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
57
5 CERTIFICATIONS
The contents of this GHG study report represent an accurate depiction of the GHG impacts
associated with the proposed Surf Farm Project. The information contained in this GHG report
is based on the best available data at the time of preparation. If you have any questions, please
contact me directly at hqureshi@urbanxroads.com.
Haseeb Qureshi
Principal
URBAN CROSSROADS, INC.
hqureshi@urbanxroads.com
EDUCATION
Master of Science in Environmental Studies
California State University, Fullerton • May 2010
Bachelor of Arts in Environmental Analysis and Design
University of California, Irvine • June 2006
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
AEP – Association of Environmental Professionals
AWMA – Air and Waste Management Association
ASTM – American Society for Testing and Materials
PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATIONS
Planned Communities and Urban Infill – Urban Land Institute • June 2011
Indoor Air Quality and Industrial Hygiene – EMSL Analytical • April 2008
Principles of Ambient Air Monitoring – California Air Resources Board • August 2007
AB2588 Regulatory Standards – Trinity Consultants • November 2006
Air Dispersion Modeling – Lakes Environmental • June 2006
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
This page intentionally left blank
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
APPENDIX 3.1:
CALEEMOD EXISTING EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
1 / 29
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
2 / 29
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
3 / 29
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
4 / 29
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
5 / 29
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
6 / 29
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Surf Farm (Existing)
Operational Year 2027
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.50
Precipitation (days)19.6
Location 33.658580571579805, -117.88186474294575
County Orange
City Newport Beach
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5905
EDFZ 7
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.29
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft)Landscape Area (sq
ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Golf Course 12.5 Acre 12.5 0.00 529,209 529,209 ——
Parking Lot 280 Space 2.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 ——
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
7 / 29
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
No measures selected
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Un/Mit.TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.6.86 6.29 4.33 48.3 0.13 0.09 12.4 12.5 0.09 3.14 3.23 6.26 13,503 13,509 1.22 0.49 41.0 13,727
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.6.82 6.24 4.68 44.8 0.12 0.09 12.4 12.5 0.09 3.14 3.23 6.26 13,000 13,007 1.24 0.51 1.06 13,192
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.5.72 5.25 3.95 38.0 0.10 0.08 10.1 10.2 0.08 2.57 2.64 6.26 10,932 10,939 1.14 0.43 14.7 11,109
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.1.04 0.96 0.72 6.94 0.02 0.01 1.85 1.86 0.01 0.47 0.48 1.04 1,810 1,811 0.19 0.07 2.43 1,839
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 6.17 5.62 4.08 48.1 0.13 0.08 12.4 12.5 0.07 3.14 3.21 —13,094 13,094 0.56 0.49 41.0 13,295
-------------------
-------------------
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
8 / 29
Area 0.66 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Energy 0.03 0.01 0.24 0.20 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —380 380 0.03 < 0.005 —381
Water ———————————0.00 29.4 29.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —29.6
Waste ———————————6.26 0.00 6.26 0.63 0.00 —21.9
Refrig.————————————————0.00 0.00
Total 6.86 6.29 4.33 48.3 0.13 0.09 12.4 12.5 0.09 3.14 3.23 6.26 13,503 13,509 1.22 0.49 41.0 13,727
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 6.13 5.57 4.44 44.6 0.12 0.08 12.4 12.5 0.07 3.14 3.21 —12,591 12,591 0.58 0.51 1.06 12,760
Area 0.66 0.66 ————————————————
Energy 0.03 0.01 0.24 0.20 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —380 380 0.03 < 0.005 —381
Water ———————————0.00 29.4 29.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —29.6
Waste ———————————6.26 0.00 6.26 0.63 0.00 —21.9
Refrig.————————————————0.00 0.00
Total 6.82 6.24 4.68 44.8 0.12 0.09 12.4 12.5 0.09 3.14 3.23 6.26 13,000 13,007 1.24 0.51 1.06 13,192
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Mobile 5.03 4.57 3.71 37.8 0.10 0.06 10.1 10.2 0.06 2.57 2.63 —10,523 10,523 0.48 0.42 14.7 10,676
Area 0.66 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Energy 0.03 0.01 0.24 0.20 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —380 380 0.03 < 0.005 —381
Water ———————————0.00 29.4 29.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —29.6
Waste ———————————6.26 0.00 6.26 0.63 0.00 —21.9
Refrig.————————————————0.00 0.00
Total 5.72 5.25 3.95 38.0 0.10 0.08 10.1 10.2 0.08 2.57 2.64 6.26 10,932 10,939 1.14 0.43 14.7 11,109
Annual ——————————————————
Mobile 0.92 0.83 0.68 6.90 0.02 0.01 1.85 1.86 0.01 0.47 0.48 —1,742 1,742 0.08 0.07 2.43 1,768
Area 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Energy < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —62.9 62.9 0.01 < 0.005 —63.1
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
9 / 29
Water ———————————0.00 4.87 4.87 < 0.005 < 0.005 —4.90
Waste ———————————1.04 0.00 1.04 0.10 0.00 —3.62
Refrig.————————————————0.00 0.00
Total 1.04 0.96 0.72 6.94 0.02 0.01 1.85 1.86 0.01 0.47 0.48 1.04 1,810 1,811 0.19 0.07 2.43 1,839
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
6.17 5.62 4.08 48.1 0.13 0.08 12.4 12.5 0.07 3.14 3.21 —13,094 13,094 0.56 0.49 41.0 13,295
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 6.17 5.62 4.08 48.1 0.13 0.08 12.4 12.5 0.07 3.14 3.21 —13,094 13,094 0.56 0.49 41.0 13,295
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
6.13 5.57 4.44 44.6 0.12 0.08 12.4 12.5 0.07 3.14 3.21 —12,591 12,591 0.58 0.51 1.06 12,760
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 6.13 5.57 4.44 44.6 0.12 0.08 12.4 12.5 0.07 3.14 3.21 —12,591 12,591 0.58 0.51 1.06 12,760
Annual ——————————————————
Golf
Course
0.92 0.83 0.68 6.90 0.02 0.01 1.85 1.86 0.01 0.47 0.48 —1,742 1,742 0.08 0.07 2.43 1,768
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
10 / 29
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.92 0.83 0.68 6.90 0.02 0.01 1.85 1.86 0.01 0.47 0.48 —1,742 1,742 0.08 0.07 2.43 1,768
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————91.2 91.2 0.01 < 0.005 —91.7
Total ————————————91.2 91.2 0.01 < 0.005 —91.7
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————91.2 91.2 0.01 < 0.005 —91.7
Total ————————————91.2 91.2 0.01 < 0.005 —91.7
Annual ——————————————————
Golf
Course
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————15.1 15.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 —15.2
Total ————————————15.1 15.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 —15.2
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
11 / 29
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
0.03 0.01 0.24 0.20 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —288 288 0.03 < 0.005 —289
Total 0.03 0.01 0.24 0.20 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —288 288 0.03 < 0.005 —289
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
0.03 0.01 0.24 0.20 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —288 288 0.03 < 0.005 —289
Total 0.03 0.01 0.24 0.20 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —288 288 0.03 < 0.005 —289
Annual ——————————————————
Golf
Course
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —47.8 47.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 —47.9
Total < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —47.8 47.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 —47.9
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e-------------------
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
12 / 29
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Product
s
0.62 0.62 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.05 0.05 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.66 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Product
s
0.62 0.62 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.05 0.05 ————————————————
Total 0.66 0.66 ————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Consum
er
Product
s
0.11 0.11 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.01 0.01 ————————————————
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
13 / 29
0.00—0.000.000.000.00—0.00—0.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.000.00Landsca
pe
Total 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
———————————0.00 29.4 29.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —29.6
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————0.00 29.4 29.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —29.6
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
———————————0.00 29.4 29.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —29.6
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————0.00 29.4 29.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —29.6
Annual ——————————————————
Golf
Course
———————————0.00 4.87 4.87 < 0.005 < 0.005 —4.90
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————0.00 4.87 4.87 < 0.005 < 0.005 —4.90
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
14 / 29
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
———————————6.26 0.00 6.26 0.63 0.00 —21.9
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————6.26 0.00 6.26 0.63 0.00 —21.9
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
———————————6.26 0.00 6.26 0.63 0.00 —21.9
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————6.26 0.00 6.26 0.63 0.00 —21.9
Annual ——————————————————
Golf
Course
———————————1.04 0.00 1.04 0.10 0.00 —3.62
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————1.04 0.00 1.04 0.10 0.00 —3.62
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
15 / 29
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
————————————————0.00 0.00
Total ————————————————0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
————————————————0.00 0.00
Total ————————————————0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Golf
Course
————————————————0.00 0.00
Total ————————————————0.00 0.00
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
16 / 29
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
17 / 29
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
18 / 29
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
-------------------
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
19 / 29
Remove ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year
Golf Course 1,839 581 868 555,008 17,505 5,529 8,263 5,282,945
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
20 / 29
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 21,632 7,211 6,586
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr)CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Golf Course 0.00 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 96,160 346 0.0330 0.0040 900,000
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year)Outdoor Water (gal/year)
Golf Course 0.00 5,840,878
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
21 / 29
Golf Course 11.6 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg)Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced
Golf Course Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Golf Course Stand-alone retail
refrigerators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr)Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day)Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
22 / 29
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year)Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which
assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 9.33 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 3.30 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise —meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 annual hectares burned
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
23 / 29
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from
observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if
received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and
consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with
extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters
Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data
of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The
four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of
different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5
representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction
measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
24 / 29
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5
representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction
measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 53.7
AQ-PM 55.9
AQ-DPM 72.9
Drinking Water 48.2
Lead Risk Housing 41.3
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 84.3
Traffic 87.4
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 76.7
Groundwater 67.5
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
25 / 29
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 69.4
Impaired Water Bodies 97.5
Solid Waste 72.4
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 4.59
Cardio-vascular 0.37
Low Birth Weights 7.38
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 19.8
Housing 56.0
Linguistic 36.5
Poverty 50.0
Unemployment 52.5
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 62.32516361
Employed 70.51199795
Median HI 63.36455794
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 75.3111767
High school enrollment 100
Preschool enrollment 95.7141024
Transportation —
Auto Access 78.96830489
Active commuting 47.46567432
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
26 / 29
Social —
2-parent households 6.723983062
Voting 48.10727576
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 25.2662646
Park access 44.10368279
Retail density 89.33658411
Supermarket access 58.95034005
Tree canopy 29.60349031
Housing —
Homeownership 18.41396125
Housing habitability 50.63518542
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 42.35852688
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 70.05004491
Uncrowded housing 52.3675093
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 32.50352881
Arthritis 67.1
Asthma ER Admissions 91.3
High Blood Pressure 72.3
Cancer (excluding skin)29.3
Asthma 65.7
Coronary Heart Disease 61.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 68.2
Diagnosed Diabetes 87.3
Life Expectancy at Birth 82.0
Cognitively Disabled 92.5
Physically Disabled 98.1
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
27 / 29
Heart Attack ER Admissions 97.8
Mental Health Not Good 69.9
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 80.7
Pedestrian Injuries 90.0
Physical Health Not Good 77.4
Stroke 70.4
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 8.9
Current Smoker 67.4
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 74.2
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 50.1
Elderly 77.9
English Speaking 87.2
Foreign-born 50.0
Outdoor Workers 59.1
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 36.7
Traffic Density 87.2
Traffic Access 87.4
Other Indices —
Hardship 20.6
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 78.8
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
28 / 29
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)34.0
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)65.0
Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535)No
Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550)No
Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617)No
a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Total Project area is 15 acres
Construction: Construction Phases Construction schedule based on information provided by the Applicant
Construction: Off-Road Equipment Construction equipment modified based on consultation with the Applicant
Construction: Trips and VMT Vendor Trips adjusted based on CalEEMod defaults for Building Construction and number of
days for Demolition, Site Preparation, Grading, and Building Construction
Construction: Architectural Coatings Rule 1113
Operations: Vehicle Data Trip characteristics based on information provided in the Traffic analysis
Operations: Energy Use Based on information provided by the Applicant
Operations: Water and Waste Water Based on information provided by Applicant
Surf Farm (Existing) Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
29 / 29
Operations: Refrigerants As of 1 January 2022, new commercial refrigeration equipment may not use refrigerants with a
GWP of 150 or greater. Further, R-404A (the CalEEMod default) is unacceptable for new
supermarket and cold storage systems as of 1 January 2019 and 2023, respectively. Beginning
1 January 2025, all new air conditioning equipment may not use refrigerants with a GWP of 750
or greater.
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
This page intentionally left blank
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
APPENDIX 4.1:
CALEEMOD PROJECT EMISSIONS MODEL OUTPUTS
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
1 / 50
Surf Farm Detailed Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Demolition (2026) - Unmitigated
3.3. Site Preparation (2026) - Unmitigated
3.5. Grading (2026) - Unmitigated
3.7. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
3.9. Building Construction (2027) - Unmitigated
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
2 / 50
3.11. Paving (2027) - Unmitigated
3.13. Architectural Coating (2027) - Unmitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
3 / 50
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
5.5. Architectural Coatings
5.6. Dust Mitigation
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
4 / 50
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
5.7. Construction Paving
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
5 / 50
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
6 / 50
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
7 / 50
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Surf Farm
Construction Start Date 4/1/2026
Operational Year 2027
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.50
Precipitation (days)19.6
Location 33.658580571579805, -117.88186474294575
County Orange
City Newport Beach
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5905
EDFZ 7
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.29
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft)Landscape Area (sq
ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Health Club 26.5 1000sqft 7.61 79,534 0.00 304,921 ——
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
8 / 50
Parking Lot 294 Space 2.65 0.00 0.00 ———
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
4.74 Acre 4.74 0.00 0.00 ———
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
No measures selected
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Un/Mit.TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.14.5 14.0 44.4 49.6 0.09 2.01 4.92 6.93 1.85 1.97 3.82 —10,557 10,557 0.42 0.12 2.42 10,600
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.14.5 14.0 19.4 28.1 0.05 0.72 0.66 1.38 0.66 0.16 0.82 —5,217 5,217 0.20 0.09 0.06 5,249
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.2.35 2.17 10.3 12.2 0.02 0.44 0.84 1.28 0.40 0.31 0.71 —2,548 2,548 0.10 0.04 0.44 2,563
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.43 0.40 1.87 2.22 < 0.005 0.08 0.15 0.23 0.07 0.06 0.13 —422 422 0.02 0.01 0.07 424
2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
-------------------
-------------------
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
9 / 50
Daily -
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
2026 6.25 5.27 44.4 49.6 0.09 2.01 4.92 6.93 1.85 1.97 3.82 —10,557 10,557 0.42 0.12 1.78 10,600
2027 14.5 14.0 19.4 28.4 0.05 0.72 0.66 1.38 0.66 0.16 0.82 —5,245 5,245 0.20 0.09 2.42 5,279
Daily -
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
2026 1.60 1.34 11.8 15.9 0.03 0.44 0.40 0.84 0.41 0.10 0.50 —3,295 3,295 0.13 0.07 0.05 3,319
2027 14.5 14.0 19.4 28.1 0.05 0.72 0.66 1.38 0.66 0.16 0.82 —5,217 5,217 0.20 0.09 0.06 5,249
Average
Daily
——————————————————
2026 1.42 1.19 10.3 12.2 0.02 0.44 0.84 1.28 0.40 0.31 0.71 —2,548 2,548 0.10 0.04 0.35 2,563
2027 2.35 2.17 7.58 10.7 0.02 0.27 0.26 0.53 0.25 0.06 0.31 —2,139 2,139 0.08 0.04 0.44 2,154
Annual ——————————————————
2026 0.26 0.22 1.87 2.22 < 0.005 0.08 0.15 0.23 0.07 0.06 0.13 —422 422 0.02 0.01 0.06 424
2027 0.43 0.40 1.38 1.96 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 0.10 0.05 0.01 0.06 —354 354 0.01 0.01 0.07 357
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Un/Mit.TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.8.40 7.69 6.92 48.9 0.13 0.32 11.0 11.3 0.31 2.79 3.11 81.4 24,805 24,887 9.86 0.55 36.5 25,333
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.7.75 7.07 7.20 42.4 0.13 0.31 11.0 11.3 0.31 2.79 3.10 81.4 24,345 24,426 9.88 0.57 1.02 24,844
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
-------------------
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
10 / 50
Unmit.7.20 6.58 6.58 38.7 0.11 0.31 8.97 9.28 0.30 2.28 2.58 81.4 22,518 22,600 9.79 0.49 13.1 23,004
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.1.31 1.20 1.20 7.06 0.02 0.06 1.64 1.69 0.06 0.42 0.47 13.5 3,728 3,742 1.62 0.08 2.16 3,809
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 5.47 4.98 3.62 42.7 0.11 0.07 11.0 11.1 0.06 2.79 2.85 —11,620 11,620 0.49 0.43 36.4 11,798
Area 2.57 2.52 0.03 3.46 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —14.2 14.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 —14.3
Energy 0.36 0.18 3.27 2.74 0.02 0.25 —0.25 0.25 —0.25 —13,055 13,055 1.22 0.11 —13,119
Water ———————————0.00 116 116 0.01 < 0.005 —116
Waste ———————————81.4 0.00 81.4 8.14 0.00 —285
Refrig.————————————————0.07 0.07
Total 8.40 7.69 6.92 48.9 0.13 0.32 11.0 11.3 0.31 2.79 3.11 81.4 24,805 24,887 9.86 0.55 36.5 25,333
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 5.44 4.94 3.94 39.6 0.11 0.07 11.0 11.1 0.06 2.79 2.85 —11,174 11,174 0.51 0.45 0.94 11,323
Area 1.95 1.95 ————————————————
Energy 0.36 0.18 3.27 2.74 0.02 0.25 —0.25 0.25 —0.25 —13,055 13,055 1.22 0.11 —13,119
Water ———————————0.00 116 116 0.01 < 0.005 —116
Waste ———————————81.4 0.00 81.4 8.14 0.00 —285
Refrig.————————————————0.07 0.07
Total 7.75 7.07 7.20 42.4 0.13 0.31 11.0 11.3 0.31 2.79 3.10 81.4 24,345 24,426 9.88 0.57 1.02 24,844
Average
Daily
——————————————————
-------------------
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
11 / 50
Mobile 4.47 4.06 3.29 33.6 0.09 0.06 8.97 9.03 0.05 2.28 2.33 —9,338 9,338 0.42 0.38 13.0 9,474
Area 2.38 2.34 0.02 2.37 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —9.74 9.74 < 0.005 < 0.005 —9.78
Energy 0.36 0.18 3.27 2.74 0.02 0.25 —0.25 0.25 —0.25 —13,055 13,055 1.22 0.11 —13,119
Water ———————————0.00 116 116 0.01 < 0.005 —116
Waste ———————————81.4 0.00 81.4 8.14 0.00 —285
Refrig.————————————————0.07 0.07
Total 7.20 6.58 6.58 38.7 0.11 0.31 8.97 9.28 0.30 2.28 2.58 81.4 22,518 22,600 9.79 0.49 13.1 23,004
Annual ——————————————————
Mobile 0.81 0.74 0.60 6.12 0.02 0.01 1.64 1.65 0.01 0.42 0.43 —1,546 1,546 0.07 0.06 2.15 1,568
Area 0.43 0.43 < 0.005 0.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —1.61 1.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 —1.62
Energy 0.07 0.03 0.60 0.50 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —2,161 2,161 0.20 0.02 —2,172
Water ———————————0.00 19.2 19.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 —19.3
Waste ———————————13.5 0.00 13.5 1.35 0.00 —47.2
Refrig.————————————————0.01 0.01
Total 1.31 1.20 1.20 7.06 0.02 0.06 1.64 1.69 0.06 0.42 0.47 13.5 3,728 3,742 1.62 0.08 2.16 3,809
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Demolition (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.52 1.28 11.5 10.9 0.02 0.45 —0.45 0.42 —0.42 —1,906 1,906 0.08 0.02 —1,913
-------------------
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
12 / 50
———————0.070.07—0.480.48——————Demoliti
on
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.08 0.07 0.63 0.60 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —104 104 < 0.005 < 0.005 —105
Demoliti
on
——————0.03 0.03 —< 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.02 0.01 0.11 0.11 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —17.3 17.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 —17.4
Demoliti
on
——————< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.03 —130 130 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.45 132
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —31.4 31.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 32.8
Hauling 0.06 0.01 0.72 0.32 < 0.005 0.01 0.16 0.17 0.01 0.04 0.05 —600 600 0.05 0.09 1.21 630
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
13 / 50
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —6.88 6.88 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.97
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —1.72 1.72 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.80
Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —32.9 32.9 < 0.005 0.01 0.03 34.5
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —1.14 1.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.15
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.28 0.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.30
Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —5.44 5.44 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.71
3.3. Site Preparation (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.56 0.47 4.46 6.27 0.01 0.23 —0.23 0.22 —0.22 —930 930 0.04 0.01 —933
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.14 0.14 —0.01 0.01 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
-------------------
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
14 / 50
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.05 0.04 0.37 0.52 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —76.4 76.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 —76.7
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.01 0.01 —< 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.01 0.01 0.07 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —12.6 12.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 —12.7
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 —97.7 97.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.34 99.1
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —31.4 31.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 32.8
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —7.74 7.74 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 7.85
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
15 / 50
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —2.58 2.58 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.69
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —1.28 1.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.30
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.43 0.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.45
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.5. Grading (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
6.14 5.16 44.3 48.0 0.09 2.01 —2.01 1.85 —1.85 —10,104 10,104 0.41 0.08 —10,138
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————4.51 4.51 —1.87 1.87 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.84 0.71 6.07 6.57 0.01 0.28 —0.28 0.25 —0.25 —1,384 1,384 0.06 0.01 —1,389
-------------------
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
16 / 50
———————0.260.26—0.620.62——————Dust
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.15 0.13 1.11 1.20 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —229 229 0.01 < 0.005 —230
Dust
From
Material
Movement
——————0.11 0.11 —0.05 0.05 ———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.10 0.10 0.09 1.58 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.09 0.09 —391 391 < 0.005 0.01 1.36 396
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 —62.7 62.7 < 0.005 0.01 0.16 65.6
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 —51.6 51.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 52.3
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —8.59 8.59 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.98
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —8.55 8.55 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.66
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
17 / 50
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —1.42 1.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.49
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.7. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.50 1.25 11.5 14.6 0.03 0.44 —0.44 0.41 —0.41 —2,734 2,734 0.11 0.02 —2,743
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.50 1.25 11.5 14.6 0.03 0.44 —0.44 0.41 —0.41 —2,734 2,734 0.11 0.02 —2,743
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.40 0.33 3.03 3.85 0.01 0.12 —0.12 0.11 —0.11 —722 722 0.03 0.01 —725
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
-------------------
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
18 / 50
Off-Roa
Equipment
0.07 0.06 0.55 0.70 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 —120 120 < 0.005 < 0.005 —120
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.09 0.08 0.08 1.32 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.08 0.08 —326 326 < 0.005 0.01 1.13 330
Vendor 0.02 0.01 0.26 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.07 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 —251 251 0.01 0.04 0.65 262
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.09 0.08 0.09 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.08 0.08 —310 310 < 0.005 0.01 0.03 313
Vendor 0.02 < 0.005 0.27 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.07 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 —251 251 0.01 0.04 0.02 262
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.02 —83.0 83.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 84.1
Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.07 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 —66.3 66.3 < 0.005 0.01 0.07 69.2
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —13.7 13.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 13.9
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —11.0 11.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 11.5
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.9. Building Construction (2027) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite ——————————————————-------------------
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
19 / 50
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.45 1.21 11.0 14.6 0.03 0.40 —0.40 0.36 —0.36 —2,734 2,734 0.11 0.02 —2,743
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
1.45 1.21 11.0 14.6 0.03 0.40 —0.40 0.36 —0.36 —2,734 2,734 0.11 0.02 —2,743
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.81 0.67 6.11 8.12 0.02 0.22 —0.22 0.20 —0.20 —1,525 1,525 0.06 0.01 —1,530
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.15 0.12 1.12 1.48 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 —252 252 0.01 < 0.005 —253
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
20 / 50
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.07 1.24 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.08 0.08 —320 320 < 0.005 0.01 1.01 325
Vendor 0.02 0.01 0.25 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.07 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 —246 246 0.01 0.03 0.59 257
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.08 1.06 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.08 0.08 —305 305 < 0.005 0.01 0.03 308
Vendor 0.02 < 0.005 0.26 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.07 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 —246 246 0.01 0.03 0.02 257
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.04 0.04 —172 172 < 0.005 0.01 0.24 174
Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.14 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 —137 137 0.01 0.02 0.14 143
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 —28.5 28.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 28.9
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —22.7 22.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 23.7
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.11. Paving (2027) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.88 0.74 6.94 9.95 0.01 0.30 —0.30 0.27 —0.27 —1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 —1,516
Paving 0.32 0.32 ————————————————
-------------------
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
21 / 50
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.88 0.74 6.94 9.95 0.01 0.30 —0.30 0.27 —0.27 —1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 —1,516
Paving 0.32 0.32 ————————————————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.14 0.12 1.14 1.64 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —248 248 0.01 < 0.005 —249
Paving 0.05 0.05 ————————————————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.03 0.02 0.21 0.30 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 —41.1 41.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 —41.3
Paving 0.01 0.01 ————————————————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.74 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —192 192 < 0.005 0.01 0.61 195
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
22 / 50
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 —183 183 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 185
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 —30.5 30.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 30.9
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —5.04 5.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 5.11
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.13. Architectural Coating (2027) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.18 0.15 1.11 1.50 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.02 —0.02 —178 178 0.01 < 0.005 —179
Architect
ural
Coating
s
11.5 11.5 ————————————————
-------------------
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
23 / 50
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.18 0.15 1.11 1.50 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.02 —0.02 —178 178 0.01 < 0.005 —179
Architect
ural
Coating
s
11.5 11.5 ————————————————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
0.02 0.02 0.12 0.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —19.5 19.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 —19.6
Architect
ural
Coating
s
1.26 1.26 ————————————————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —3.23 3.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 —3.24
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.23 0.23 ————————————————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
24 / 50
Offsite ——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.02 —64.0 64.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.20 64.9
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.02 —60.9 60.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 61.7
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —6.77 6.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.86
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 —1.12 1.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.14
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
25 / 50
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Health
Club
5.47 4.98 3.62 42.7 0.11 0.07 11.0 11.1 0.06 2.79 2.85 —11,620 11,620 0.49 0.43 36.4 11,798
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 5.47 4.98 3.62 42.7 0.11 0.07 11.0 11.1 0.06 2.79 2.85 —11,620 11,620 0.49 0.43 36.4 11,798
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Health
Club
5.44 4.94 3.94 39.6 0.11 0.07 11.0 11.1 0.06 2.79 2.85 —11,174 11,174 0.51 0.45 0.94 11,323
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 5.44 4.94 3.94 39.6 0.11 0.07 11.0 11.1 0.06 2.79 2.85 —11,174 11,174 0.51 0.45 0.94 11,323
Annual ——————————————————
Health
Club
0.81 0.74 0.60 6.12 0.02 0.01 1.64 1.65 0.01 0.42 0.43 —1,546 1,546 0.07 0.06 2.15 1,568
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.81 0.74 0.60 6.12 0.02 0.01 1.64 1.65 0.01 0.42 0.43 —1,546 1,546 0.07 0.06 2.15 1,568
4.2. Energy
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
26 / 50
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Health
Club
————————————9,158 9,158 0.87 0.11 —9,212
Parking
Lot
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————9,158 9,158 0.87 0.11 —9,212
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Health
Club
————————————9,158 9,158 0.87 0.11 —9,212
Parking
Lot
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————9,158 9,158 0.87 0.11 —9,212
Annual ——————————————————
Health
Club
————————————1,516 1,516 0.14 0.02 —1,525
Parking
Lot
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
27 / 50
Total ————————————1,516 1,516 0.14 0.02 —1,525
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Health
Club
0.36 0.18 3.27 2.74 0.02 0.25 —0.25 0.25 —0.25 —3,897 3,897 0.34 0.01 —3,908
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.36 0.18 3.27 2.74 0.02 0.25 —0.25 0.25 —0.25 —3,897 3,897 0.34 0.01 —3,908
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Health
Club
0.36 0.18 3.27 2.74 0.02 0.25 —0.25 0.25 —0.25 —3,897 3,897 0.34 0.01 —3,908
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.36 0.18 3.27 2.74 0.02 0.25 —0.25 0.25 —0.25 —3,897 3,897 0.34 0.01 —3,908
Annual ——————————————————
Health
Club
0.07 0.03 0.60 0.50 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —645 645 0.06 < 0.005 —647
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
28 / 50
0.00—0.000.000.000.00—0.00—0.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.000.00Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
Total 0.07 0.03 0.60 0.50 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.05 —0.05 —645 645 0.06 < 0.005 —647
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Product
s
1.73 1.73 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.23 0.23 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
0.62 0.57 0.03 3.46 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —14.2 14.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 —14.3
Total 2.57 2.52 0.03 3.46 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —14.2 14.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 —14.3
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Product
s
1.73 1.73 ————————————————
-------------------
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
29 / 50
————————————————0.230.23Architect
ural
Coating
s
Total 1.95 1.95 ————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Consum
er
Product
s
0.32 0.32 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.04 0.04 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
0.08 0.07 < 0.005 0.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —1.61 1.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 —1.62
Total 0.43 0.43 < 0.005 0.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 —1.61 1.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 —1.62
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Health
Club
———————————0.00 116 116 0.01 < 0.005 —116
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
30 / 50
0.00—0.000.000.000.000.00———————————Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
Total ———————————0.00 116 116 0.01 < 0.005 —116
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Health
Club
———————————0.00 116 116 0.01 < 0.005 —116
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————0.00 116 116 0.01 < 0.005 —116
Annual ——————————————————
Health
Club
———————————0.00 19.2 19.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 —19.3
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————0.00 19.2 19.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 —19.3
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
31 / 50
Health
Club
———————————81.4 0.00 81.4 8.14 0.00 —285
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————81.4 0.00 81.4 8.14 0.00 —285
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Health
Club
———————————81.4 0.00 81.4 8.14 0.00 —285
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————81.4 0.00 81.4 8.14 0.00 —285
Annual ——————————————————
Health
Club
———————————13.5 0.00 13.5 1.35 0.00 —47.2
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————13.5 0.00 13.5 1.35 0.00 —47.2
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
32 / 50
CO2eRN2OCH4CO2TNBCO2BCO2PM2.5TPM2.5DPM2.5EPM10TPM10DPM10ESO2CONOxROGTOGLand
Use
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Health
Club
————————————————0.07 0.07
Total ————————————————0.07 0.07
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Health
Club
————————————————0.07 0.07
Total ————————————————0.07 0.07
Annual ——————————————————
Health
Club
————————————————0.01 0.01
Total ————————————————0.01 0.01
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
33 / 50
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
34 / 50
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
35 / 50
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
-------------------
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
36 / 50
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description
Demolition Demolition 4/1/2026 4/28/2026 5.00 20.0 —
Site Preparation Site Preparation 4/29/2026 6/9/2026 5.00 30.0 —
Grading Grading 6/10/2026 8/18/2026 5.00 50.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 8/19/2026 10/12/2027 5.00 300 —
Paving Paving 7/21/2027 10/12/2027 5.00 60.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 8/18/2027 10/12/2027 5.00 40.0 —
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
37 / 50
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Crawler Tractors Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 87.0 0.43
Grading Rubber Tired Loaders Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 150 0.36
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Grading Graders Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 367 0.40
Grading Scrapers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 423 0.48
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 14.0 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36
Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 37.0 0.48
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix
Demolition ————
Demolition Worker 10.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
38 / 50
Demolition Vendor 1.00 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 8.75 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck ——HHDT
Site Preparation ————
Site Preparation Worker 7.50 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor 1.00 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck ——HHDT
Grading ————
Grading Worker 30.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor 2.00 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck ——HHDT
Building Construction ————
Building Construction Worker 25.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 8.00 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck ——HHDT
Paving ————
Paving Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck ——HHDT
Architectural Coating ————
Architectural Coating Worker 5.00 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck ——HHDT
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
39 / 50
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.
5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 119,301 39,767 19,304
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy)Material Exported (cy)Acres Graded (acres)Material Demolished (Ton of
Debris)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 700 —
Site Preparation ——15.0 0.00 —
Grading ——250 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.39
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day)PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction
Water Exposed Area 3 74%74%
Water Demolished Area 2 36%36%
5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres)% Asphalt
Health Club 0.00 0%
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
40 / 50
Parking Lot 2.65 100%
Other Asphalt Surfaces 4.74 100%
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors
kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2026 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
2027 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year
Health Club 1,632 515 770 492,490 15,535 4,902 7,329 4,687,853
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 119,301 39,767 19,351
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
41 / 50
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr)CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Health Club 9,655,716 346 0.0330 0.0040 12,158,880
Parking Lot 0.00 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year)Outdoor Water (gal/year)
Health Club 0.00 23,000,000
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Health Club 151 —
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
42 / 50
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg)Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced
Health Club Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
User Defined 750 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Health Club Stand-alone retail
refrigerators and
freezers
User Defined 150 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr)Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day)Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
43 / 50
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year)Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which
assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 9.33 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 3.30 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise —meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 annual hectares burned
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
44 / 50
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from
observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if
received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and
consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with
extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters
Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data
of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The
four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of
different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5
representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction
measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
45 / 50
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5
representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction
measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 53.7
AQ-PM 55.9
AQ-DPM 72.9
Drinking Water 48.2
Lead Risk Housing 41.3
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 84.3
Traffic 87.4
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 76.7
Groundwater 67.5
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
46 / 50
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 69.4
Impaired Water Bodies 97.5
Solid Waste 72.4
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 4.59
Cardio-vascular 0.37
Low Birth Weights 7.38
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 19.8
Housing 56.0
Linguistic 36.5
Poverty 50.0
Unemployment 52.5
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 62.32516361
Employed 70.51199795
Median HI 63.36455794
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 75.3111767
High school enrollment 100
Preschool enrollment 95.7141024
Transportation —
Auto Access 78.96830489
Active commuting 47.46567432
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
47 / 50
Social —
2-parent households 6.723983062
Voting 48.10727576
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 25.2662646
Park access 44.10368279
Retail density 89.33658411
Supermarket access 58.95034005
Tree canopy 29.60349031
Housing —
Homeownership 18.41396125
Housing habitability 50.63518542
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 42.35852688
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 70.05004491
Uncrowded housing 52.3675093
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 32.50352881
Arthritis 67.1
Asthma ER Admissions 91.3
High Blood Pressure 72.3
Cancer (excluding skin)29.3
Asthma 65.7
Coronary Heart Disease 61.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 68.2
Diagnosed Diabetes 87.3
Life Expectancy at Birth 82.0
Cognitively Disabled 92.5
Physically Disabled 98.1
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
48 / 50
Heart Attack ER Admissions 97.8
Mental Health Not Good 69.9
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 80.7
Pedestrian Injuries 90.0
Physical Health Not Good 77.4
Stroke 70.4
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 8.9
Current Smoker 67.4
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 74.2
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 50.1
Elderly 77.9
English Speaking 87.2
Foreign-born 50.0
Outdoor Workers 59.1
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 36.7
Traffic Density 87.2
Traffic Access 87.4
Other Indices —
Hardship 20.6
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 78.8
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
49 / 50
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)34.0
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)65.0
Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535)No
Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550)No
Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617)No
a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Total Project area is 15 acres
The recreational pool building size was based on the total building footprint (79,534 sf) divided
by 3 floors. The recreational pool lot acreage was based on the lot acreage of the clubhouse,
athlete accommodation building, and wave pool.
Construction: Construction Phases Construction schedule based on information provided by the Applicant
Construction: Off-Road Equipment Construction equipment modified based on consultation with the Applicant
Construction: Trips and VMT Vendor Trips adjusted based on CalEEMod defaults for Building Construction and number of
days for Demolition, Site Preparation, Grading, and Building Construction
Construction: Architectural Coatings Rule 1113
Surf Farm Detailed Report, 3/28/2025
50 / 50
Operations: Vehicle Data Trip characteristics based on information provided in the Traffic analysis
Operations: Energy Use Based on information provided by the Applicant
Operations: Water and Waste Water Based on information provided by Applicant
Operations: Refrigerants As of 1 January 2022, new commercial refrigeration equipment may not use refrigerants with a
GWP of 150 or greater. Further, R-404A (the CalEEMod default) is unacceptable for new
supermarket and cold storage systems as of 1 January 2019 and 2023, respectively. Beginning
1 January 2025, all new air conditioning equipment may not use refrigerants with a GWP of 750
or greater.
Operations: Architectural Coatings Area based on building square footages. Note that the "Health Club" use was only included to
model Natural Gas usage
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
1 / 27
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
2 / 27
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
3 / 27
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
4 / 27
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
5 / 27
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
6 / 27
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Surf Farm (Holes to Remain)
Operational Year 2027
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.50
Precipitation (days)19.6
Location 33.658580571579805, -117.88186474294575
County Orange
City Newport Beach
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5905
EDFZ 7
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.28
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft)Landscape Area (sq
ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Golf Course 15.0 Hole 105 0.00 0.00 0.00 ——
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
7 / 27
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
No measures selected
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Un/Mit.TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.1.53 1.39 1.01 11.9 0.03 0.02 3.07 3.09 0.02 0.78 0.80 1.08 3,247 3,248 0.25 0.12 10.2 3,300
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.1.52 1.38 1.10 11.1 0.03 0.02 3.07 3.09 0.02 0.78 0.80 1.08 3,122 3,123 0.25 0.13 0.26 3,168
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.1.25 1.13 0.92 9.38 0.03 0.02 2.51 2.52 0.01 0.64 0.65 1.08 2,609 2,610 0.23 0.11 3.63 2,651
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.23 0.21 0.17 1.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.46 0.46 < 0.005 0.12 0.12 0.18 432 432 0.04 0.02 0.60 439
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 1.53 1.39 1.01 11.9 0.03 0.02 3.07 3.09 0.02 0.78 0.80 —3,247 3,247 0.14 0.12 10.2 3,297
-------------------
-------------------
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
8 / 27
Area 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Water ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Waste ———————————1.08 0.00 1.08 0.11 0.00 —3.77
Total 1.53 1.39 1.01 11.9 0.03 0.02 3.07 3.09 0.02 0.78 0.80 1.08 3,247 3,248 0.25 0.12 10.2 3,300
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 1.52 1.38 1.10 11.1 0.03 0.02 3.07 3.09 0.02 0.78 0.80 —3,122 3,122 0.14 0.13 0.26 3,164
Area 0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Water ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Waste ———————————1.08 0.00 1.08 0.11 0.00 —3.77
Total 1.52 1.38 1.10 11.1 0.03 0.02 3.07 3.09 0.02 0.78 0.80 1.08 3,122 3,123 0.25 0.13 0.26 3,168
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Mobile 1.25 1.13 0.92 9.38 0.03 0.02 2.51 2.52 0.01 0.64 0.65 —2,609 2,609 0.12 0.11 3.63 2,647
Area 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Water ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Waste ———————————1.08 0.00 1.08 0.11 0.00 —3.77
Total 1.25 1.13 0.92 9.38 0.03 0.02 2.51 2.52 0.01 0.64 0.65 1.08 2,609 2,610 0.23 0.11 3.63 2,651
Annual ——————————————————
Mobile 0.23 0.21 0.17 1.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.46 0.46 < 0.005 0.12 0.12 —432 432 0.02 0.02 0.60 438
Area 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Water ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Waste ———————————0.18 0.00 0.18 0.02 0.00 —0.62
Total 0.23 0.21 0.17 1.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.46 0.46 < 0.005 0.12 0.12 0.18 432 432 0.04 0.02 0.60 439
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
9 / 27
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
1.53 1.39 1.01 11.9 0.03 0.02 3.07 3.09 0.02 0.78 0.80 —3,247 3,247 0.14 0.12 10.2 3,297
Total 1.53 1.39 1.01 11.9 0.03 0.02 3.07 3.09 0.02 0.78 0.80 —3,247 3,247 0.14 0.12 10.2 3,297
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
1.52 1.38 1.10 11.1 0.03 0.02 3.07 3.09 0.02 0.78 0.80 —3,122 3,122 0.14 0.13 0.26 3,164
Total 1.52 1.38 1.10 11.1 0.03 0.02 3.07 3.09 0.02 0.78 0.80 —3,122 3,122 0.14 0.13 0.26 3,164
Annual ——————————————————
Golf
Course
0.23 0.21 0.17 1.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.46 0.46 < 0.005 0.12 0.12 —432 432 0.02 0.02 0.60 438
Total 0.23 0.21 0.17 1.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.46 0.46 < 0.005 0.12 0.12 —432 432 0.02 0.02 0.60 438
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
10 / 27
——————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Golf
Course
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Golf
Course
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
11 / 27
Annual ——————————————————
Golf
Course
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Product
s
0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Product
s
0.00 0.00 ————————————————
-------------------
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
12 / 27
————————————————0.000.00Architect
ural
Coating
Total 0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Consum
er
Product
s
0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
13 / 27
0.00—0.000.000.000.000.00———————————Golf
Course
Total ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Golf
Course
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
———————————1.08 0.00 1.08 0.11 0.00 —3.77
Total ———————————1.08 0.00 1.08 0.11 0.00 —3.77
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Golf
Course
———————————1.08 0.00 1.08 0.11 0.00 —3.77
Total ———————————1.08 0.00 1.08 0.11 0.00 —3.77
Annual ——————————————————
Golf
Course
———————————0.18 0.00 0.18 0.02 0.00 —0.62
Total ———————————0.18 0.00 0.18 0.02 0.00 —0.62
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
14 / 27
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
15 / 27
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
16 / 27
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
17 / 27
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
-------------------
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
18 / 27
Avoided ——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
Remove
d
——————————————————
Subtotal ——————————————————
———————————————————
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year
Golf Course 456 144 215 137,620 4,341 1,371 2,049 1,309,965
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 —
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
19 / 27
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr)CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Golf Course 0.00 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year)Outdoor Water (gal/year)
Golf Course 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Golf Course 2.00 —
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg)Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
20 / 27
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr)Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day)Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
21 / 27
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year)Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which
assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 9.33 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 3.30 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise —meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from
observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if
received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and
consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with
extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters
Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data
of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The
four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of
different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
22 / 27
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5
representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction
measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5
representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction
measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
23 / 27
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 53.7
AQ-PM 55.9
AQ-DPM 72.9
Drinking Water 48.2
Lead Risk Housing 41.3
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 84.3
Traffic 87.4
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 76.7
Groundwater 67.5
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 69.4
Impaired Water Bodies 97.5
Solid Waste 72.4
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 4.59
Cardio-vascular 0.37
Low Birth Weights 7.38
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 19.8
Housing 56.0
Linguistic 36.5
Poverty 50.0
Unemployment 52.5
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
24 / 27
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 62.32516361
Employed 70.51199795
Median HI 63.36455794
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 75.3111767
High school enrollment 100
Preschool enrollment 95.7141024
Transportation —
Auto Access 78.96830489
Active commuting 47.46567432
Social —
2-parent households 6.723983062
Voting 48.10727576
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 25.2662646
Park access 44.10368279
Retail density 89.33658411
Supermarket access 58.95034005
Tree canopy 29.60349031
Housing —
Homeownership 18.41396125
Housing habitability 50.63518542
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 42.35852688
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 70.05004491
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
25 / 27
Uncrowded housing 52.3675093
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 32.50352881
Arthritis 67.1
Asthma ER Admissions 91.3
High Blood Pressure 72.3
Cancer (excluding skin)29.3
Asthma 65.7
Coronary Heart Disease 61.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 68.2
Diagnosed Diabetes 87.3
Life Expectancy at Birth 82.0
Cognitively Disabled 92.5
Physically Disabled 98.1
Heart Attack ER Admissions 97.8
Mental Health Not Good 69.9
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 80.7
Pedestrian Injuries 90.0
Physical Health Not Good 77.4
Stroke 70.4
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 8.9
Current Smoker 67.4
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 74.2
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
26 / 27
Children 50.1
Elderly 77.9
English Speaking 87.2
Foreign-born 50.0
Outdoor Workers 59.1
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 36.7
Traffic Density 87.2
Traffic Access 87.4
Other Indices —
Hardship 20.6
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 78.8
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)34.0
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)65.0
Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535)No
Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550)No
Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617)No
a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
Surf Farm (Holes to Remain) Detailed Report, 10/8/2024
27 / 27
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Total Project area is 15 acres
Construction: Construction Phases Construction schedule based on information provided by the Applicant
Construction: Off-Road Equipment Construction equipment modified based on consultation with the Applicant
Construction: Trips and VMT Vendor Trips adjusted based on CalEEMod defaults for Building Construction and number of
days for Demolition, Site Preparation, Grading, and Building Construction
Construction: Architectural Coatings Rule 1113
Operations: Vehicle Data Holes to remain
Operations: Energy Use Based on information provided by the Applicant
Operations: Water and Waste Water Based on information provided by Applicant
Operations: Refrigerants Holes to remain
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
1 / 35
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
2 / 35
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
3 / 35
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
4 / 35
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
5 / 35
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
6 / 35
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Surf Farm (with Sequestration)
Operational Year 2027
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.50
Precipitation (days)19.6
Location 33.658580571579805, -117.88186474294575
County Orange
City Newport Beach
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5905
EDFZ 7
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.29
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft)Landscape Area (sq
ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Recreational
Swimming Pool
26.5 1000sqft 7.61 79,534 0.00 304,921 ——
Parking Lot 294 Space 2.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 ——
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
7 / 35
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
4.74 Acre 4.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 ——
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
No measures selected
2. Emissions Summary
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Un/Mit.TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.00 -0.01 -0.04 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 0.00 -2.73 -2.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.73
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.00 -0.01 -0.04 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 0.00 -2.73 -2.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.73
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.00 -0.01 -0.04 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 0.00 -2.73 -2.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.73
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit.0.00 > -0.005 -0.01 0.00 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 0.00 -0.45 -0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.45
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
-------------------
-------------------
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
8 / 35
——————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Area 0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Water ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Waste ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Vegetati
on
—-0.01 -0.04 —-0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 —-2.73 -2.73 ———-2.73
Total 0.00 -0.01 -0.04 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 0.00 -2.73 -2.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.73
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Area 0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Water ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Waste ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Vegetati
on
—-0.01 -0.04 —-0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 —-2.73 -2.73 ———-2.73
Total 0.00 -0.01 -0.04 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 0.00 -2.73 -2.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.73
Average
Daily
——————————————————
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Area 0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Water ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Waste ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Vegetati
on
—-0.01 -0.04 —-0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 —-2.73 -2.73 ———-2.73
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
9 / 35
Total 0.00 -0.01 -0.04 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 0.00 -2.73 -2.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.73
Annual ——————————————————
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Area 0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Water ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Waste ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Vegetati
on
—> -0.005 -0.01 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 —-0.45 -0.45 ———-0.45
Total 0.00 > -0.005 -0.01 0.00 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 0.00 -0.45 -0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.45
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
10 / 35
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
11 / 35
——————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
12 / 35
0.00—0.000.000.000.00————————————Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
Total ————————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
13 / 35
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00 0.00 —0.00 —0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Consum
er
Product
s
0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Total 0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
-------------------
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
14 / 35
————————————————0.000.00Consum
er
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Total 0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Consum
er
Product
s
0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.00 0.00 ————————————————
Total 0.00 0.00 ————————————————
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
15 / 35
0.00—0.000.000.000.000.00———————————Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
Total ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
16 / 35
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Parking
Lot
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Annual ——————————————————
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
17 / 35
0.00—0.000.000.000.000.00———————————Parking
Lot
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
Total ———————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —0.00
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
18 / 35
——————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
19 / 35
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
20 / 35
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
Annual ——————————————————
Total ——————————————————
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Tristania —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Palm —> -0.005 > -0.005 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Pine —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Eucalypt
us
—< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Queen
Palms
—< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Olive —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
-------------------
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
21 / 35
0.00———0.000.00—< 0.005< 0.005< 0.005< 0.005< 0.005< 0.005< 0.005—< 0.005< 0.005—Pepper
Trees
Deciduo
us
—> -0.005 > -0.005 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Evergre
en
—-0.01 > -0.005 —> -0.005 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Subtotal —-0.01 > -0.005 —> -0.005 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Tristania ————————————15.9 15.9 ———15.9
Palm ————————————-7.95 -7.95 ———-7.95
Pine ————————————2.68 2.68 ———2.68
Eucalypt
us
————————————16.2 16.2 ———16.2
Queen
Palms
————————————0.10 0.10 ———0.10
Olive ————————————0.45 0.45 ———0.45
Pepper
Trees
————————————0.89 0.89 ———0.89
Deciduo
us
————————————-19.0 -19.0 ———-19.0
Evergre
en
————————————-11.9 -11.9 ———-11.9
Subtotal ————————————-2.73 -2.73 ———-2.73
Remove
d
——————————————————
Tristania ——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Palm ——-0.02 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 ———————
Pine ——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Eucalypt
us
——0.01 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Queen
Palms
——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
22 / 35
Olive ——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Pepper
Trees
——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Deciduo
us
——-0.01 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 ———————
Evergre
en
——-0.03 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 ———————
Subtotal ——-0.04 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 ———————
———————————————————
Total —-0.01 -0.04 —-0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 —-2.73 -2.73 ———-2.73
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Tristania —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Palm —> -0.005 > -0.005 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Pine —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Eucalypt
us
—< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Queen
Palms
—< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Olive —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Pepper
Trees
—< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Deciduo
us
—> -0.005 > -0.005 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Evergre
en
—-0.01 > -0.005 —> -0.005 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Subtotal —-0.01 > -0.005 —> -0.005 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Tristania ————————————15.9 15.9 ———15.9
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
23 / 35
Palm ————————————-7.95 -7.95 ———-7.95
Pine ————————————2.68 2.68 ———2.68
Eucalypt
us
————————————16.2 16.2 ———16.2
Queen
Palms
————————————0.10 0.10 ———0.10
Olive ————————————0.45 0.45 ———0.45
Pepper
Trees
————————————0.89 0.89 ———0.89
Deciduo
us
————————————-19.0 -19.0 ———-19.0
Evergre
en
————————————-11.9 -11.9 ———-11.9
Subtotal ————————————-2.73 -2.73 ———-2.73
Remove
d
——————————————————
Tristania ——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Palm ——-0.02 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 ———————
Pine ——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Eucalypt
us
——0.01 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Queen
Palms
——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Olive ——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Pepper
Trees
——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Deciduo
us
——-0.01 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 ———————
Evergre
en
——-0.03 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 ———————
Subtotal ——-0.04 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 ———————
———————————————————
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
24 / 35
Total —-0.01 -0.04 —-0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 —-2.73 -2.73 ———-2.73
Annual ——————————————————
Avoided ——————————————————
Tristania —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Palm —> -0.005 > -0.005 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Pine —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Eucalypt
us
—< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Queen
Palms
—< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Olive —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Pepper
Trees
—< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Deciduo
us
—> -0.005 > -0.005 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Evergre
en
—> -0.005 > -0.005 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Subtotal —> -0.005 > -0.005 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 —0.00 0.00 ———0.00
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Tristania ————————————2.63 2.63 ———2.63
Palm ————————————-1.32 -1.32 ———-1.32
Pine ————————————0.44 0.44 ———0.44
Eucalypt
us
————————————2.67 2.67 ———2.67
Queen
Palms
————————————0.02 0.02 ———0.02
Olive ————————————0.08 0.08 ———0.08
Pepper
Trees
————————————0.15 0.15 ———0.15
Deciduo
us
————————————-3.15 -3.15 ———-3.15
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
25 / 35
Evergre ————————————-1.97 -1.97 ———-1.97
Subtotal ————————————-0.45 -0.45 ———-0.45
Remove
d
——————————————————
Tristania ——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Palm ——> -0.005 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 ———————
Pine ——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Eucalypt
us
——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Queen
Palms
——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Olive ——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Pepper
Trees
——< 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 ———————
Deciduo
us
——> -0.005 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 ———————
Evergre
en
——> -0.005 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 ———————
Subtotal ——-0.01 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 ———————
———————————————————
Total —> -0.005 -0.01 —> -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 -0.01 > -0.005 > -0.005 > -0.005 —-0.45 -0.45 ———-0.45
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year
Recreational
Swimming Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
26 / 35
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 0.00
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr)CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Recreational Swimming Pool 0.00 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
27 / 35
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year)Outdoor Water (gal/year)
Recreational Swimming Pool 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Recreational Swimming Pool 0.00 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg)Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
28 / 35
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr)Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day)Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year)Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
Deciduous 77.0 81,847 264
Evergreen 115 228,113 1,134
Palm 154 86,984 334
Tristania -17.0 28,745 137
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
29 / 35
Palm -57.0 32,195 123
Pine -23.0 37,986 184
Eucalyptus -13.0 26,751 133
Queen Palms -5.00 2,401 9.00
Olive -2.00 3,957 19.6
Pepper Trees -2.00 4,205 20.9
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which
assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 9.33 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 3.30 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise —meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from
observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if
received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and
consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with
extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters
Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data
of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The
four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of
different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
30 / 35
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5
representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction
measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5
representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction
measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
31 / 35
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 53.7
AQ-PM 55.9
AQ-DPM 72.9
Drinking Water 48.2
Lead Risk Housing 41.3
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 84.3
Traffic 87.4
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 76.7
Groundwater 67.5
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 69.4
Impaired Water Bodies 97.5
Solid Waste 72.4
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 4.59
Cardio-vascular 0.37
Low Birth Weights 7.38
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 19.8
Housing 56.0
Linguistic 36.5
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
32 / 35
Poverty 50.0
Unemployment 52.5
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 62.32516361
Employed 70.51199795
Median HI 63.36455794
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 75.3111767
High school enrollment 100
Preschool enrollment 95.7141024
Transportation —
Auto Access 78.96830489
Active commuting 47.46567432
Social —
2-parent households 6.723983062
Voting 48.10727576
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 25.2662646
Park access 44.10368279
Retail density 89.33658411
Supermarket access 58.95034005
Tree canopy 29.60349031
Housing —
Homeownership 18.41396125
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
33 / 35
Housing habitability 50.63518542
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 42.35852688
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 70.05004491
Uncrowded housing 52.3675093
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 32.50352881
Arthritis 67.1
Asthma ER Admissions 91.3
High Blood Pressure 72.3
Cancer (excluding skin)29.3
Asthma 65.7
Coronary Heart Disease 61.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 68.2
Diagnosed Diabetes 87.3
Life Expectancy at Birth 82.0
Cognitively Disabled 92.5
Physically Disabled 98.1
Heart Attack ER Admissions 97.8
Mental Health Not Good 69.9
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 80.7
Pedestrian Injuries 90.0
Physical Health Not Good 77.4
Stroke 70.4
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 8.9
Current Smoker 67.4
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 74.2
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
34 / 35
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 50.1
Elderly 77.9
English Speaking 87.2
Foreign-born 50.0
Outdoor Workers 59.1
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 36.7
Traffic Density 87.2
Traffic Access 87.4
Other Indices —
Hardship 20.6
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 78.8
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)34.0
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)65.0
Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535)No
Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550)No
Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617)No
a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
Surf Farm (with Sequestration) Detailed Report, 11/19/2024
35 / 35
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Total Project area is 15 acres
The recreational pool building size was based on the total building footprint (79,534 sf) divided
by 3 floors. The recreational pool lot acreage was based on the lot acreage of the clubhouse,
athlete accommodation building, and wave pool.
Construction: Construction Phases Construction schedule based on information provided by the Applicant
Construction: Off-Road Equipment Construction equipment modified based on consultation with the Applicant
Construction: Trips and VMT Vendor Trips adjusted based on CalEEMod defaults for Building Construction and number of
days for Demolition, Site Preparation, Grading, and Building Construction
Construction: Architectural Coatings Rule 1113
Operations: Vehicle Data Sequestration Only
Operations: Energy Use Sequestration Only
Operations: Water and Waste Water Sequestration Only
Operations: Refrigerants Sequestration Only
Operations: Road Dust Sequestration Only
Operations: Consumer Products Sequestration Only
Operations: Architectural Coatings Sequestration Only
Operations: Landscape Equipment Sequestration Only
Operations: Solid Waste Sequestration Only
Surf Farm Greenhouse Gas Analysis
16241-10 GHG Report
This page intentionally left blank