Now our irreplaceable Southern California coast may be at risk. The world's largest mining company, BHP Billiton, has proposed building a massive Liquefied Natural Gas complex just off the Southern California coast.

If this project is approved, BHP Billiton would build a floating terminal for supertankers bringing LNG from foreign countries. To hold the 72 million gallons of LNG delivered by the supertankers, the complex would include three storage tanks rising 160 feet out of the sea. From the storage tanks, two pipelines would be laid across the ocean floor for 22 miles before they reach land.

I understand the need to seek alternative sources of energy as our state grows. But BHP Billiton's proposal carries a risk we can't afford to take.

BHP Billiton assures us that this huge offshore complex would be perfectly safe. But this unproven technology would be put into practice for the first time off our coast at Oxnard and Malibu.

Liquefied Natural Gas should not be confused with the natural gas that many of us use in our homes. LNG is a concentrated form of natural gas and can burn at extremely high temperatures. Because of its massive size, an accident or terrorist attack at the BHP Billiton processing plant could create a flash fire that would burn out of control. A blaze that involved only two of the three planned storage tanks could produce a fire extending more than 7 miles, according to safety experts. In February, the federal Government Accountability Office declared that LNG safety studies are inadequate and we need to know more about LNG transport and processing.

Despite assurances of safety, large-scale explosions at LNG facilities have happened in the past. Just two years ago, an LNG pipeline in Nigeria sprung a leak that ignited and caused the pipeline to explode. The resulting fire consumed 16.5 square miles before it was extinguished — after 48 hours of firefighting.

If we were going to trust a company to experiment with this new technology, the first thing we should do is look at its safety record. Let's take a look at BHP Billiton. In the Gulf of Mexico, BHP Billiton promised residents that its natural gas platform was hurricane proof. So what happened to that natural gas platform during Hurricane Rita in 2005? It was torn from its moorings and drifted for more than 100 miles before coming to rest, upside down.

Fully 43 percent of the goods imported into America travel through the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Just a few days' delay in the movement of goods can cost our businesses millions.

The proposed BHP Billiton LNG complex off our coast is just too risky. There are proven alternatives to meeting our energy needs. Energy conservation, solar energy, wind power and vast quantities of geothermal power — available right here in California — along with existing natural gas supplies can meet California's energy needs.

On the whole, the President's remarks last night were a step in the right direction, but they're just the tip of the ice berg as far as what needs to be done.

Say what you will about his shortcomings – and there are many – he does deserve some credit for finally stepping up to the plate and embracing the Democratic energy efficiency/renewable energy agenda that we in the California Legislature brought forward last year.

A lot of what the President said last night may be old news to us, there is some good in it nonetheless. Let's face it – nothing but good can come from reducing our country's dependence on foreign oil. By investing in alternative fuels, we can protect our environment by reducing levels of carbon monoxide and other toxic air pollutants. Some alternative fuels can even be produced in the U.S., which has the potential to add to our economy while simultaneously reducing our importation of oil.

And while the President's plan to reduce American gas usage by 20 percent over the next 10 years and promote more fuel-efficient vehicles are laudable ideas, he should be throwing his weight behind legislation passed overwhelmingly by the House of Representatives last week which would rescind $14 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for oil drillers and reserve the money to develop alternative energy projects and conservation technologies.

The Bush Administration's plan seems to mean well, and at least they're finally acknowledging that a problem exists, but we need a much more fast-acting plan. Global climate change represents a real and growing threat to future generations and the time for action is now. Changes must be made to the way we've been living and doing business in this country.

Global climate change threatens our air quality, water supply, public health, power grid reliability, and some of our largest industries: agriculture, forestry, skiing, as well as tourism – not to mention our very survival as a species.

I'm certain we'll all be watching to make sure the President's words last night are backed up with actions.

Happy New Year! I want to start this year off by sharing something from the end of last year.

On December 3, the day before being sworn in to my third term in the Assembly, I ran the 2006 California International Marathon (CIM), a 26-mile, 385-yard. Starting at the Folsom Dam, the race passed through outlying Sacramento-area communities, and finished at the State Capitol building in downtown Sacramento.

I ran the race with one goal: qualify for the 2007 Boston Marathon.

I was able to cover the course in 3:14:41. I am pleased to report that my time did qualify me for the 2007 Boston Marathon!

So now it's on to Boston. The marathon will be held April 16, 2007. The Boston Marathon is considered one of the world's oldest and most prestigious road racing events.

Ringling Bros. and Barnum and Bailey circus opens this week in Sacramento, despite a federal lawsuit brought by some of the nation's largest animal advocacy groups, over 100 United States Department of Agriculture citations for deficiencies in animal care and four active investigations into violations of the federal Animal Welfare Act.

One of the USDA's open investigations into Ringling's animal welfare practices concerns the August 2004 actions of Ringling elephant handler Troy Metzler, who was documented beating a chained elephant with a bullhook outside of an Oakland, CA performance. This wasn't the first time Metzler, who has been nicknamed "Captain Hook", has been caught on videotape and begs the question, if these are the actions of Ringling employees in public, what goes on behind closed doors?

Ringling is also under fire for its treatment of elephants which are forced to travel thousands of miles confined in train boxcars, beaten with bullhooks, and frequently chained. Ringling's V.P. of Animal Stewardship, Bruce Reid, tells the public that bullhooks are used "like leashes for dogs." API was unable to find a leash at the local pet supply store that was made of wood or metal and featured a sharp, 2-pronged hook at the dog end. We did confirm though, that in California it is illegal to confine or chain a dog in the same manner Ringling does its elephants.

The Ringling Bros. "blue tour" is in California from July 12 to September 24 of 2006. The elephants' total performance time in our state will be less than 10 hours. For this, the animals will be forced to travel, chained and confined in boxcars, for 11 weeks and almost 3,200 miles—and remember this is just in California. On a yearly basis, the animals of the blue tour travel more than 11 months and more than 11,500 miles. There is nothing about this treatment that resembles conservation or shows a commitment to quality of life for these animals.

That being the case, when Ringling says its elephants are "treated like cherished members of the family" one does have to cringe at the family dynamic that vision presents.

Some circuses, such as California-based Circus Vargas, have chosen to drop elephant acts for more modern, and profitable, acts. Ringling, despite declining attendance and ho-hum reviews of its "new and improved" one ring show, is still living in the dark ages when it comes to what audiences, and animals, truly thrive on.

California activists, legislators and experts have come together to lead the nation in the ethical debate surrounding the fact that captive elephants are suffering — and dying — from painful, captivity-induced ailments and the other serious animal welfare concerns mentioned above.

To ensure the future safety of elephants, and other animals lacking the important protections we afford to dogs, cats and rightly, even ducks used for foie gras, we have asked the state to create a Select Committee in Animal Welfare. First on the agenda is the treatment of elephants within California.

Paper or plastic? It seems like an innocent enough question, doesn't it? But, when you stop and think about where all the grocery bags we use end up, the question no longer seems quite so simple – particularly in the case of plastic bags.

The numbers are astounding: Californians use more than 19 billion plastic grocery bags each year, creating 147,038 tons of waste in our landfills. With Californians throwing away over 600 bags per second, they are creating enough waste every year to circle the planet over 250 times.

As an avid runner I witness the problem first-hand. Running along the Los Angeles River, I come across thousands of plastic bags on the river banks, in trees, and floating in the river itself.  My anecdotal experience was confirmed by the facts: During a recent Los Angeles River cleanup, plastic bags and film constituted 45 percent of the volume of litter collected. Litter collection on beaches and state highways and in cities and counties costs the state $303.2 million each year.

It became clear to me that we needed to do something. That's why I authored Assembly Bill 2449, which passed both houses of the Legislature and is now waiting the Governor's signature.

Each year millions of seabirds, sea turtles, fish, and marine mammals become entangled in marine debris or ingest plastics they have mistaken for food. According to recent U.S. EPA estimates, marine debris has had a negative impact on at least 267 species around the world. The plastic can constrict an animals' movements and kill marine animals through exhaustion. Animals may starve to death as the plastic clogs their intestines preventing them from obtaining vital nutrients.

Toxic substances present in plastics can cause death or reproductive failure in fish, shellfish and wildlife. In April of 2002, a juvenile Minke whale was found dead on the shores of France. Researchers concluded the cause of death was the approximately two pounds of plastic packaging and supermarket bags found in its stomach.

California's annual Coastal Cleanup and the 1999 Pilot Litter Study by the Department of Conservation found that disposable retail bags are some of the most commonly littered items. Plastic bags are easily carried by wind from uncovered trash cans and dumpsters, vehicles, and solid waste facilities including landfills.

Volunteer coastal cleanups and public education efforts have been helpful in keeping California's coastlines clean, but more needs to be done. To reduce marine debris the amount of waste generated on land must be reduced and disposed of properly.

California needs to ensure that plastic bags are recycled and kept from fouling the environment. While curbside recycling is the most convenient and effective method of collecting items to be recycled, the infrastructure is not in place to allow plastic bags to be placed in curbside recycling bins. If California is to begin to address this problem we need a statewide program until curbside recycling of plastic bags is a reality. My Assembly Bill 2449 is such a program.

Assembly Bill 2449 requires grocery and retail stores to take back and recycle plastic grocery bags. It will make California and Rhode Island the only states in the U.S. with such a program.

When this legislation becomes law, more than 7,000 retail stores in California will be required to prominently display plastic bag recycling bins. With the exception of curb-side recycling, the 7000-plus receptacles represent the greatest number of points of collection for any recycling endeavor in California. The bill also requires stores and bag manufactures to fund an educational campaign to raise awareness of plastic bag recycling and the use of reusable bags.

In addition the legislation requires each store to make reusable bags available for customers to purchase in an effort to reduce the amount of waste created in the first place. 

Mark Murray, executive director of Californians Against Waste, said, "AB 2449 is the best recycling bill for plastics we have been able to move in the last 20 years."

In the absence of the multi-pronged program created by AB 2449 we would simply continue to maintain the status quo and that is clearly unacceptable. It is my hope that in the future we will have curbside recycling for plastic bags because that will be the single most effective method for their collection.

Until that time, however, we can accomplish much by making some modest changes in our behavior. For AB 2449 to reach its full potential Californians need to remember to save our plastic bags and return them to the store to be recycled. We also can increase our use of reusable bags. By simply purchasing a few inexpensive reusable bags, keeping them in the trunks of our cars and using them each time we shop, we can make a huge positive impact. They're already doing it in much of Europe.

Please help urge the Governor to sign this important measure into law.

The documentary An Inconvenient Truth by Al Gore has opened peoples eyes to the issue of global warming like never before. Suddenly, people that never expected to be having conversations with friends about such things as greenhouse gases, energy efficiency and renewable resources are having them.

The problem is most of the people in the know believe that were past the point of talking dramatic action is necessary to prevent a climate catastrophe. They warn that unless we reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 70 percent, global warming could threaten the habitability of the earth hence the inconvenient part of Al Gores truth.

There is broad scientific agreement that global climate change primarily due to the burning of fossil fuels represents a real and growing threat to future generations. If left unchecked, global climate change threatens Californias air quality, water supply, public health, power grid reliability, and some of our largest industries: agriculture, forestry, skiing, as well as tourism not to mention our very survival as a species.

To take the threat of global warming seriously, we must make changes to the way weve been living and doing business, because maintaining the status quo cannot be tolerated any longer. The time to take action is now.

With only a week to go in this years legislative session, there are several landmark pieces of legislation authored by Democrats which would limit greenhouse gas emissions, promote energy efficiency, and invest in renewable resources.

Ive authored Assembly Bill 2021 as part of the solution. This legislation will ensure that all utilities aggressively invest in all achievable cost effective energy efficiency programs. This effort alone would reduce forecasted electricity demand by 10 percent over the next 10 years, offsetting the need to build 11 major power plants.

AB 2021 accelerates all utilities electricity and natural gas efficiency programs and will help California achieve enormous environmental, economic, and job benefits. As written the bill calls for a 174 million metric tons CO2 reduction by 2020, which is the equivalent of taking one million cars off the road.

In addition, for the past two years Ive worked in coordination with Senator Kevin Murray on Senate Bill 1 the California Solar Initiative which was finally signed into law on Monday. The bill places 3,000 megawatts of solar electricity in California over the next 10 years, which will directly lead to a three million ton reduction in greenhouse gases.

Another piece of legislation that deals with the reduction of greenhouse gases and has been one of the most widely discussed bills of this session is Assembly Bill 32, authored by Speaker Fabian Núñez and Assemblymember Fran Pavley. AB 32 would establish a mandatory reporting system to track and monitor greenhouse gas emission levels and would limit greenhouse gas emissions in California to 1990 levels by the year 2020 an almost 25 percent decrease.

Protecting our states air quality is an issue that Ive also been actively involved in Ive partnered with Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata on Senate Bill 1368, which would prohibit large utilities and corporations from entering into long-term power contracts with suppliers whose electricity sources do not meet certain emission standards. The bottom line is that cheap, dirty coal plants could not sell power on long-term contracts to California, and that would be an incredible achievement.

Along the same lines, Senator Perata and Senator Joe Simitian have come forward with Senate Bill 107, which Assemblymember Sam Blakeslee and I have co-authored, that would require retail sellers of electricity to procure at least 20 percent of their retail sales from renewable power by 2010 instead of 2017. The end result being more environmentally-friendly power coming to the states power grid sooner, rather than later.

At this point you might ask where our Republican friends across the aisle stand on these issues and vital pieces of legislation. Either the majority of them choose to ignore the problem entirely or simply vote no on every environmentally-friendly piece of legislation set before them. Turning a blind eye to the problem and doing nothing is no longer allowable.

Many Republicans at the state level prefer to take their cues on global warming from the Federal Government, but thats a dangerous position to take when you consider the vacuum of leadership weve seen with the Bush Administration and its rejection of the Kyoto Protocol. It is incumbent upon us as Democrats to act now.