California’s cap-and-trade program, a key instrument of climate action under Governor Gavin Newsom, now depends on a state legislative decision. This program is viewed as particularly vital in contrast to the environmental policies of the Trump era. The forthcoming vote, led by the predominantly Democratic Legislature, is set for Saturday, and it will determine the extension of this program which is currently due to end post-2030.
The cap-and-trade initiative was initiated in 2013 and is structured to enable substantial greenhouse gas emitters to purchase emission allowances from the state. The number of these allowances on the market gradually decreases over time. The revenue accrued through this program goes towards managing climate change, supporting affordable housing and transportation initiatives, and providing Californian residents with utility bill credits.
There’s a proposal set forth to not only extend the cap-and-trade program till 2045, but also to better integrate the diminishing emission cap with the state’s climate aims. The adjustments could lead to possible enhancements of carbon removal projects. A name change to “cap and invest” is also proposed to accentuate the program’s focus on funding climate change mitigation programs.
As the legislative decision approaches, officials have to juggle between adhering to the state’s robust climate objectives and managing the cost of living. California is known to have some of the steepest utility and gas prices nationwide, which poses a unique challenge. In order to balance both the state’s climate change goals and maintaining living costs, legislators will need a carefully thought-out strategy.
Amidst the projected shutdown of two oil refineries, which together constitute approximately 18% of the state’s refining capability, state officials face mounting pressures. The priority now is to secure a stable fuel supply while managing costs, as per energy regulators. Such external pressures further complicate decision-making around the cap-and-trade program.
Proponents of renewing the lifespan of the cap-and-trade initiative argue that it will promote business certainty around the program’s foreseeable future. A recent report from Clean and Prosperous California indicated that over a span of a year and a half, the state missed out on $3.6 billion in revenue primarily because of uncertainty, thus emphasizing the need for a clear strategic direction.
The cap-and-trade initiative stands as a significant and cost-efficient solution to limiting carbon emissions. However, it is also attracting criticism as some believe its extension would lead to an escalated cost of living. With gas costs having risen by roughly 26 cents per gallon due to the cap and trade program, it’s clear that the program has substantial market impact.
The role of cap and trade in elevating electricity prices is deemed minor since the state’s electricity grid is not highly carbon-intensive. Although this program does affect gas prices, its input to electricity price hikes has been relatively small. This consideration is becoming increasingly important as lawmakers deliberate over the program’s future.
Lawmakers and lobbyists have voiced criticism about the hurried nature of the cap-and-trade deal dispatch, citing inadequate public engagement. This protest underlines the need for a more transparent and inclusive process in decision-making, especially when it involves public interest to such a large extent.
The proposed cap-and-trade bills form part of an extensive package designed to expedite the state’s energy transition and alleviate the financial burden on Californians. This package includes several other vital measures aimed at advancing environmental and economic goals in harmony.
One such proposed bill within this package intends to expedite permits for oil production in Kern County. Another proposed legislation seeks to impose higher monitoring requirements in zones heavily afflicted by pollution. These initiatives testify to a holistic approach to addressing the state’s environmental and energy concerns.
To tackle the cost incurred from wildfire damage caused by utility companies, there is a proposal under consideration to replenish a special fund. Alongside, public financing might be introduced for the establishment of electric utility projects, indicating a forward-thinking approach to energy generation and management.
Finally, there is also a prospective measure that would allow the state’s grid operator to collaborate with a regional entity for the management of power markets spanning western states. This bill is designed to bolster grid reliability, showcasing the state’s commitment to not just sustain, but also improve upon its power infrastructure.
The post California’s Key Climate Initiative Hangs in Legislative Balance appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
