ClimateIntel.com

On July 18, 2007, California became the first in the nation to adopt a state-wide green building code for new construction.  “By adopting this first-in-the-nation statewide green building code, California is again leading the way to fight climate change and protect the environment,” said Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in his press release.  The California Building Standards Commission “should be commended for bringing everyone to the table including representatives of the construction and building trades industry, environmental groups and labor organizations, and achieving something no other state has been able to,” lauded Commission Chair Rosario Mario.  Others, however, say that the new code should have been much stronger.

(more…)

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) announced today its draft “scoping plan” to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in California to 1990 levels by the year 2020.  Pursuant to the Global Warming Solutions Act, or AB 32, CARB is required to prepare and approve a scoping plan by January 1, 2009.  The draft scoping plan proposes a comprehensive set of actions that would affect virtually every sector of the California economy, including utilities, oil refineries, carmakers, farmers, manufacturers, and forest managers.  Beyond the sweeping impact on California’s $1.7 trillion economy, the plan will likely be seen as a model for other states and the nation as a whole.

(more…)

On June 26, 2008, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) is scheduled to release its initial draft “scoping plan” describing the programs, measures, and approaches that California will use to achieve the greenhouse gas emission reductions required under the Global Warming Solutions Act, or AB 32. The scoping plan, when completed, will serve as California’s policy blueprint for developing direct regulations, alternative compliance mechanisms, monetary and non-monetary incentives, voluntary actions, and market-based mechanisms such as a cap-and-trade system.

(more…)

The Port of Long Beach, the second largest container port in the United States, has proposed a 10-year, $750 million redevelopment project to increase the efficiency and environmental performance of its Middle Harbor container shipping terminals.  The proposed improvements could double the operations of these terminals to 3.3 million twenty-foot-equivalent containers a year.  However, consistent with the Port’s Green Port Policy and Clean Air Action Plan, the project would implement aggressive environmental measures to cut air pollution by 50 percent from existing conditions.  Among other measures, the project would require the use of shore-to-ship electrical power (also known as “cold-ironing”), lower-emission switching locomotives, alternative-fuel powered cargo equipment, compliance with a vessel speed reduction program, cleaner tugboats and barges, and LEED “gold” building standards for the main terminal building.

Despite these aggressive measures, the Port’s recently released environmental documents estimate that the project’s greenhouse gas emissions would more than quadruple, from 208,107 to 920,858 CO₂ equivalent emissions by the year 2030, causing a “significant” environmental impact.  Thus, before approving the project, the Board of Harbor Commissioners must find that there are no additional feasible mitigation measures that could be implemented to reduce the significant environmental impact and, if the impact cannot be reduced or avoided, that the project’s benefits outweigh the environmental harm.  Interested parties have until at least July 11, 2008 to submit their comments.  The final measures that are adopted by the Board will likely be seen as model for ports throughout the country as increased pressure is applied on ports nationwide to respond to climate change concerns.

California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. recently announced an agreement with the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from a major airport expansion project.

San Diego Airport is the busiest single-runway airport in the U.S. To accommodate anticipated future growth, the airport plans to add ten new gates, new overnight jet and passenger parking, and expanded aircraft taxiways.

To reduce GHG emissions, the airport agreed to a series of specific measures, including:

• preparing an inventory of GHG emissions from aircraft ground movement and reducing themby 20% by 2015;
• providing landside electrical power to aircraft to eliminate the need to run on-board engines to use electricity while on the ground;
• replacing existing tow vehicles and airport shuttles with electric or alternative fuel vehicles;
• using green construction methods, equipment, materials, and design in new construction; and
• requiring LEED Certification for all new facilities.

(more…)

The California Senate is considering the nation’s first “truth in advertising” standards for claims associated with carbon credits or offsets. Pursuant to the proposed legislation (SB 1762), authored by Senate President pro Tem Don Perata, it would be unlawful for any person to represent in an advertisement or in any sales or promotional materials that a greenhouse gas “credit” reduces greenhouse gas emissions unless it meets certain conditions. Violators could face fines, as well as civil liability to recover the cost of the credit.

This is not the first time California has weighed in on the need for greater regulation of the carbon market. In February 2008, the California Attorney General co-signed a letter to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) from 9 states (AR, CA, CT, DE, IL, ME, NH, OK, and VT) urging the Commission to take action to amend its green marketing guidelines to address the growing carbon market. Unlike the ongoing FTC proceeding, however, the proposed California legislation would provide specific standards applicable to offsets sold on the voluntary market in California.

(more…)

The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) proposed one of the nation’s first carbon taxes to be assessed on stationary sources of greenhouse gas emissions. Over 2,500 district-permitted facilities would be subject to the tax, which would be computed by multiplying the total carbon dioxide equivalent (CDE) emissions from the permitted facility by the unit fee of $0.042 per metric ton of CDE. The proposed tax would raise about $1.1 million annually to help cover the cost of the District’s Climate Protection Program activities. BAAQMD estimates that most facilities with relatively low greenhouse gas emissions would have annual fees under $1. The largest emitters, however, would have annual fees in excess of $50,000 (i.e., the five Bay Area petroleum refineries and the two largest Bay Area power plants).

Several industry groups oppose the proposed carbon tax. These groups have raised concerns about the financial burden of the tax and the potential interference with a state-wide initiative to address greenhouse gas emissions. BAAQMD staff disputes these claims, explaining that the fees should have a minor financial impact on businesses. Moreover, the fees - not a “carbon tax” according to District staff - represent a modest step to recover the District’s costs and would not lead to inconsistencies or confusion with a state-wide program. A public hearing is scheduled for May 21, 2008 to consider adoption of the proposed fees.

Further demonstrating its leadership on climate change response, California’s Secretary for Environmental Protection signed an agreement with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) to support China’s efforts to address climate change. Pursuant to the agreement, California will share valuable information, such as academic research, effective policy initiatives, lessons learned and technological innovations, with the Chinese provincial governments to support their efforts to develop strategies and actions to mitigate global climate change. California is currently developing its own program to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 30% by the year 2020.

Governor Schwarzenegger issued the following statement about the agreement: “California alone cannot solve climate change - this is a global problem that requires a global solution. America has to lead, and we are doing so even with or without Washington. California is not waiting for the federal government to take action but instead we are forming agreements and building relationships with countries like China to fight climate change.”

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) recently estimated that approximately 25% of the state’s greenhouse gas emissions come from electricity generation. In response, the California legislature established a wide variety of programs to reduce electricity consumption, to implement emission performance standards (SB 1368), and to increase the use of renewable electricity sources, such as solar and wind power (SB 1078 and SB 107). The California legislature also directed CARB to adopt rules and regulations to reduce all sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the state to 1990 levels by the year 2020 (an estimated 30% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from business-as-usual estimates). Despite these significant steps to address global climate change, one group thinks California can do more.

Earlier this month, proponents of a renewable energy initiative submitted 735,000 signatures to qualify for the November ballot. The initiative, entitled the Solar and Clean Energy Act of 2008, would require that all utilities in California achieve 40% renewable electricity by 2020, and 50% by 2025. By comparison, current law requires that retail sellers, including investor owned utilities (IOUs), increase their share of renewable electricity by 1% per year so that, by the close of 2010, 20% of retail sales are generated from renewable energy sources (pending legislation would increase this standard to 33% by 2020). Notably, as of 2006, California’s IOUs generated only about 13% of their electricity from renewable sources.

(more…)

In California, project sponsors and government agencies are facing increased pressure to analyze the impact of proposed projects on climate change. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, before approving a project, to evaluate the potentially significant environmental impacts of that project and to adopt feasible measures to mitigate those impacts.

These requirements place project sponsors and California agencies in a difficult position because there is currently no regulatory guidance on how to evaluate an individual project’s contribution to climate change, much less how to determine whether a project’s potential contribution to climate change is “significant.” To address this difficulty, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) has been instructed to develop CEQA guidelines “for the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions or the effects of greenhouse gas emissions.” OPR must complete its draft guidelines by July 1, 2009.

(more…)