Gas station ban drawing regional interest
Council hopes other cities also will impose the controversial measure
Petaluma’s move to become the first city in the nation to ban new gas stations to combat climate change could be the beginning of a trend in the Bay Area and beyond, supporters and opponents said.
The controversial measure, which the Petaluma City Council approved unanimously last week, prohibits the permitting of new gas stations. It also prohibits the expansion of gasoline fueling equipment, such as gas pumps and underground storage tanks, at existing stations. Existing stations still would be allowed to apply for permits to install electric vehicle chargers and hydrogen fueling equipment.
“Of course, we do hope that other jurisdictions will also do this because we all share the same environment,” Petaluma Mayor Teresa Barrett said Wednesday. “As we move down the road, we have a very short window to improve what we have right now and get our greenhouse gases down.”
Barrett said officials from cities such as Emeryville and on the Peninsula have reached out to inquire about the city’s ban. Other cities such as Novato, which is contemplating a controversial 28pump Costco gas station, might also consider a similar measure.
“That is something that we should definitely take a look at is prohibiting uses that are not in concurrence with the attempts to try to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and really try to promote more environmental sustainability,” Novato Mayor Pat Eklund said.
Similar to how Petaluma is finalizing a Safeway gas station proposal submitted before its ban was approved, Novato must consider the Costco project on its own merits as it was submitted well before such a ban would be considered by the city, Eklund said.
Petaluma’s existing 16 gas stations and an upcoming gas station will be allowed to remain. All residences in the city — including residences proposed to be built through 2025 — would be within a five-minute drive to the near
est gas station, according to city staff members.
Opponents, such as the California Fuels and Convenience Alliance, say such bans are shortsighted and will lead to higher fuel prices from lack of competition and hinder the expansion of electric and hydrogen fueling areas.
“This assumption is naïve at best, or textbook NIMBYISM at its worst,” the group said in a statement Wednesday. “Despite California’s intended goal of phasing out combustion engines, the fact remains that a vast majority of Californians continue to drive gaspowered cars.”
The group, which represents 300 gas station companies and haulers in California, including suppliers for BART and San Francisco Muni transit systems, says gas stations still will play a vital role in the future.
“They’re looking at gas stations as a fossil fuel source as opposed to a fuel and transportation source,” said Sam Bayless, the organization’s policy director. “Our members aren’t married to fossil fuels. They’re married to providing transportation fuels to consumers safely and cost-effectively. We’ll sell as long as we can make money, so what we’re trying to do right now is figure out how we can make electric-vehicle charging and hydrogen work for us.”
Stand.earth, a national environmental organization advocating for phasing out fossil fuel facilities from gas stations to pipelines, has been tracking such bans throughout the U.S. While some cities have enacted temporary bans, Petaluma is the first city it has found to approve a permanent ban in response to climate change. Other local governments, such as Sonoma County, Santa Rosa, American Canyon and others, are now being eyed for similar bans.
Matt Krogh, who directs advocacy efforts for Stand. earth, said there has been a notable failure at the federal and state levels to address fossil fuels.
“What we’re really looking at is a movement of cities and counties who are taking direct action on fossil fuel infrastructure and working to prevent new fossil fuel infrastructure to come in and pollute the community, live a short lifespan and eventually be phased out entirely by circumstances,” he said.
Banning gas stations alone will not reduce greenhouse gas emissions; that will require broader changes to city transit systems, promoting greater use of nonmotorized transportation, said Woody Hastings, energy program manager at the Climate Center in Santa Rosa.
In some circumstances, new gas stations could be warranted such as if residents need to drive 25 to 30 miles to refuel, Hastings said. It’s questionable, Hastings said, whether companies would be willing to risk the investment to build the stations given the acceleration of electric vehicle technologies.
But in communities such as Novato, where many gas stations already exist, projects such as Costco’s proposed 28-pump gas station are “over-the-top absurd” in 2021, he said.
“I think really the matter at hand is really to recognize that in the age of consequences of the climate crisis it is not the time to be constructing new fossil fuel infrastructure,” Hastings said.
Chance Cutrano, vice chairman of Sierra Club’s San Francisco Bay chapter, said Novato endorsed the organization’s 100% renewable energy commitment in 2017. He said he hopes that was not an empty promise.
“That wasn’t just for building electrification,” said Cutrano, who is a Fairfax councilman. “That was for clean transportation as well. That’s why the Sierra Club has supported some of those candidates and why we look forward to working with them to realize that commitment they made in 2017.”
Petaluma’s decision comes after Gov. Gavin Newsom’s order last year banning the production of new gas-powered vehicles starting in 2035. The need for gasoline fuel won’t immediately disappear when the ban is enacted, Bayless said.
As electric vehicle charging times become quicker and more efficient over time, gas stations are a “best bet” for the future of refueling as the state transitions, Bayless said.
“The state’s grid is not up to par to be able to deliver the amount of electricity that’s going to be needed,” Bayless said. “So are we going to have the state and investor-owned utilities raise the electricity rates to pay to put electric vehicle chargers in everybody’s houses? That’s the kind of the way they’re going now, but that’s incredibly expensive.”