After months of negotiations, California legislative leaders reached 11th hour agreement On a set of closely watched climate and energy costs.
State Senate Interim Speaker Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg) and Parliament Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister) Gov. Gavin Newsom announced the deal a few days before the legislative session ended on Friday. It includes reauthorizing California’s iconic cap and trading plans as well as expansion of regional power markets, among other projects.
“After several months of hard work, we agree to historic reforms to save your electricity bills, stabilize natural gas supplies and cut toxic air pollution while also rapidly tracking California’s transition to a clean, green job-creating economy.” Newsom said in a statement.
The energy and environmental groups in the packaging have victory and losses, expected to pass by at the end of the week before moving to Newsom’s desk for his signature.
One of the most prominent projects is California’s leading cap and trade plan expansion In addition to the 2030 expiration date to 2045, the plan also sets restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions and allows large polluters to buy and sell unused emission allowances at quarterly auctions.
Cap trading is considered crucial for California to adhere to its climate goals – including achieving Carbon neutrality by 2045 – Billions of dollars in revenue have also been brought in, which helps fund state climate efforts such as high-speed rail and safe drinking water programs. Newsom has been pushing for months to reauthorize the program’s current form, and environmental groups want to see changes in how the program runs and where it costs.
Revised language released Wednesday, including Senate Bill 840 and Parliament Bill 1207, which includes some but not all changes they wish, such as priority funding Nature-based climate solutions and advice on providing direct consumer rebates from the California Climate Mitigation Fund to help address affordability issues.
“By aligning California’s timeline with California’s ambitious emission reduction targets, it is possible that California will achieve its climate goals in the most cost-effective way,” said Katelyn Roedner Sutter, director of California’s nonprofit environmental defense, who urged lawmakers to pass the bill.
But there are also “missed opportunities” according to the nonprofit Climate Center, including free allowances to preserve the oil and gas industry – allowing pollution to put businesses against competitors in other states.
“Overall, this proposal is better than the direct remand of caps and trade plans, but not too much,” said Ryan Schleeter, director of communications at the Climate Center. “It leaves billions of dollars on the table to support climate solutions and address the state’s affordability challenges. California has more work to do to shift the economic burden of the climate crisis from taxpayers to companies responsible for wealthy, pollution.”
The package also includes AB 825, which creates avenues for California to participate in the regional electricity market. If passed, the bill would expand partnerships with other Western countries to buy and sell more clean energy to improve grid reliability and save money for taxpayers.
“This historic agreement gives California a way to provide cleaner, cheaper, and more reliable energy,” Rivas said in a statement. “This is a landmark affordability agreement that will save Californians billions of dollars.”
Some supporters believe that improvements in cooperation across the West will help accelerate climate progress, while opponents are concerned that California will control its power grid for out-of-state authorities, including the federal government.
“This will be disastrous for California,” said Loretta Lynch, former chairman of the California Public Utilities Commission. Lynch said among other issues, the bill would eliminate all statutory requirements for independent California systems operators, whose power market is aligned with the state’s public health and environmental laws and would undermine the state’s ability to withdraw from regional programs in case of problems.
Other groups said the language released on Wednesday solved many issues and helped protect California’s interests.
“This proposal clears the energy market and can save real money from Californians,” Alex Jackson, director of California’s nonprofit cleaning capacity, said in a statement. “This means we can work with our neighbors to ensure that the West has the affordable, reliable, and clean ability to meet needs.”
SB 352 is also included in Wednesday’s package that will establish air pollution monitoring programs in some of the state’s most polluted communities, while SB 254, which will supplement the state’s wildfire responsibility fund to help cover wildfire losses and harm mitigation efforts.
“This bold legislative package will provide every corner of Golden State with regard to energy affordability and wildfire prevention, expanding clean drinking water to thousands, which also cements the historic agreement on California’s landmark climate policy,” McGill said in a statement.
However, some advocacy groups are upset by advocacy groups not included in the package, including a “repair” of the state’s overhaul of California’s environmental quality law. The overhaul simplifies new buildings in the state. Meanwhile, another bill supported by many environmental groups Will create a climate super fund To make fossil fuel companies be pushed to next year for losses due to damage caused by their emissions.
The most controversial of the packaging is SB 237, a bill that could help increase oil production in the state, while lawmakers are talking about working to stabilize the market and targeting future gasoline price increases. This follows this year’s major announcement from oil companies 66 and Valero Close two large refineries In the state.
In the compromise, the bill would simplify environmental approvals for new oil wells in Kern County, but make it harder for companies to obtain approval to drill on the coast.
In a statement, a radical group campaign for safe and healthy California expressed concern about the legislation that “crowded legislation in the last 72 hours of the legislature” and urged lawmakers to reject the proposal.
“In California and around the world, the transition from oil is underway, with refineries from Texas to Los Angeles,” the statement said. “But in California, Big Oil is taking advantage of the threat of refinery closures as a bargaining chip to pressure lawmakers to approve more drilling.”
The governor’s office told The Times that Newsom “looks forward” to sign the legislation when he arrives at his desk.
Time worker Laura Nelson and Melody Petersen contributed to the report.
