Category Archives: General

Climate pollution threatens the health of California’s families and the prosperity of our economy. Last November, California began a vitally important program that reduces climate pollution, rewards clean energy innovation, and helps ensure that the biggest emitters are responsible for their own pollution.

The program places a firm limit on overall climate pollution from the largest industrial emitters in California, allows flexible solutions to achieve that limit across sources, and requires major industrial emitters to bear a small portion of their pollution costs by requiring them to obtain carbon emissions allowances under the state’s cap-and-trade program, under which allowances may be obtained in public auctions or trades on the open market.

Fast forward five months, Californians are already realizing critical health and economic benefits from this groundbreaking environmental policy.  And, the Golden State continues to lead the way in clean energy and transportation jobs due in large part to AB 32, which has opened the door for greater investment in the clean energy economy. More good news: Yesterday, the state fulfilled a requirement of 2012 AB 32 Legislation by releasing its blueprint for how to expand these benefits by investing proceeds from auctions to strengthen our economy, our health, and the environment.

California’s plan focuses on making key greenhouse gas reductions in three sectors: transportation, energy, and natural resources. The goal is to create multiplier effects that allow Californians to draw benefits from these opportunities that far outweigh the investment.  And every day new research shows just how widely the benefits of clean economy investments can ripple.  EPA recently released a study showing that if energy costs accounted for the health impacts of burning fossil fuels, they would increase by between $361 and $886.5 billion annually.  When California invests in clean energy those hidden health benefits accrue for years to come – and they protect our families and our children.

Yet some polluters in California lag behind California’s innovative clean energy economy.   They continue to delay, deny and obstruct.  On the same day the state released its plan, the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), on behalf of certain companies, filed a lawsuit challenging whether California could auction carbon allowances at all.  The timing was no coincidence; a similar lawsuit was filed last November the day before California’s successful first auction.  So it comes as no surprise to see PLF attempt to block the good news for California’s clean energy economy.

So who’s behind the lawsuit?  The usual suspects.  The Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) has a long history of being a loyal partner to special interests like big tobacco in its effort to avoid legal responsibility for the health impacts of cigarette smoke.  More recently, PLF petitioned the United States Supreme Court to reconsider EPA’s scientific finding, affirmed by a unanimous panel of judges in the U.S. Court of Appeals, that climate pollution negatively impacts human health and welfare.

Given PLF’s history, it’s not surprising that the group has chosen to focus its obstructionism on California’s most important health and environmental regulation.  But it is unfortunate.  As Californians work together to address dangerous pollution and strengthen our economy, PLF and its allies lag behind yet again, investing in litigation rather than innovative solutions to urgent societal challenges.

By Larissa Koehler and Tim O’Connor

It is well-documented that petroleum refineries release large amount of pollutants that are harmful to the environment and make people sick.  In California, these refineries are among the largest sources of carbon dioxide, accounting for 7 of the top 10 sources for climate pollution. According to data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, refineries can also emit large amount of toxic compounds, including carcinogens and respiratory irritants.

California’s landmark global warming law (AB 32) offers a solution, placing nearly all refineries in the state within a cap-and-trade program that started January 1st of this year. One of the most innovative features of cap and trade was putting a price on carbon, forcing refinery business models to take a long look at the long term financial costs of releasing greenhouse gases.

As a result of the program, evidence shows that petroleum refineries in California are starting to change their ways.  Recently, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) released 2011 emissions data showing that 11 of the state’s refineries logged significant reductions in their greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution, as compared to 2010. This represents over half of the refineries reporting emissions to the agency.

In addition to cutting climate pollution, many of California’s biggest and dirtiest refineries are also documenting major cuts in other pollutants.  As reported to the US EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) database, 2011 was a banner year for reductions of many compounds that are known to be harmful to human health, with many at record low levels – clear evidence that AB 32-inspired reductions can improve public health and help mitigate the effects of climate change.

What is the likely reason for the reduced GHGs at California Oil Refineries?

Evidence shows that reductions of GHGs and toxic pollutants are not a mere result of facilities suspending or cutting production through voluntary or involuntary action. Instead, evidence points to AB 32’s cap-and-trade program inspiring facilities to reduce emissions by investing in and upgrading equipment.  A prime example is Valero’s refinery in Benicia, CA, which decreased covered GHG emissions by over 95,000 metric tons while also cutting ammonia emissions by 98%, sulfuric acid by 84%, and benzene by 49%.

As reported in the Benicia Herald, this decrease was the direct result of a new flue gas scrubber put into use at the refinery in 2011.

According to Sue Fisher Jones, public affairs manager for the Benicia refinery, the Valero installation.

“…will let the refinery retire existing furnaces, allowing new, energy-efficient furnaces to operate and reduce the refinery’s greenhouse gas footprint.”

Valero demonstrates that putting a dollar figure on emissions leads industries to change, yielding pollution reductions while saving energy and fuel use.  Not only will the environment benefit from fewer emissions, human health will improve as well.

California should be proud of the progress it has achieved thus far with AB 32’s cap-and-trade program, but we shouldn’t rest on this success  Environmental integrity and human health depend on a continuing decline in emissions.  Thankfully, CARB has created a program, outlining strategies that monitor changes in pollution and adopts necessary measures to mitigate pollution if needed.

AB 32 policies that encourage petroleum refineries to cut pollution are a tremendous start to mitigating climate change.  However, in order to meet the goals of AB 32, more refineries need to incorporate energy efficient solutions.  Such steps will not only strengthen California’s economy, but will go a long way towards ensuring clean air and better health for present and future generations.

California’s landmark clean energy bill AB 32 received a big boost today from the San Francisco California Superior Court in the case Citizen’s Climate Lobby et. al., v. California Air Resources Board.

The Court’s decision offered unequivocal support for the legality of the offsets portion of AB 32’s cap-and-trade program, a huge shot in the arm for momentum going into the second greenhouse gas allowance auction on  February 19th.  Similarly, by finding that the state’s offset program is in alignment with AB 32, a bright green light has been given for further investment in projects aimed to reduce pollution both in California and outside our borders.

In this suit, EDF joined as an official party to assist the State of California’s defense.  Also joining in the defense was a collection of entities including The Nature Conservancy, the Climate Action Reserve and a collection of business interests. This broad spectrum of support for AB 32 shows that offset investments can deliver on multiple levels for the state.

First, offsets create new opportunities to fund upgrades and pollution reduction in sectors, including agriculture, forestry and industrial gases, that may not otherwise be covered under mandatory emissions limits.  Pollution reduction in these sectors enables a greater overall response to climate change, which means positive impacts on the climate and human health.

Second, allowing high quality offsets ensures that a diversity of cost-effective pollution reduction projects can qualify for cap-and-trade compliance.  This reduces overall program costs while maintaining the environmental integrity of the program.

As more projects and ideas develop under the AB 32 offsets program, California will be better able to transition to a low-carbon economy.  In short, the decision of the Superior Court has authorized the continuation of a program that will be an integral part of California’s climate change goals, spur investment in a clean economy, and maintain California’s position as a leader in the fight to combat climate change.

California moved into the fast lane on the low-carbon development highway when it launched its carbon market this month. Now it has the opportunity to do even more to stop dangerous climate change while cutting the costs of controlling global warming pollution.  Recommendations from a group of experts on how Reducing Emissions from tropical Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) can come into California’s market show how.

In the world of greenhouse gas emissions, tropical deforestation is huge. Accounting for about 15% of these emissions globally, deforestation emits more than all cars, trucks, buses, trains and airplanes on the planet — combined.

When California launched its cap-and-trade program Jan.1, it created the second largest carbon market in the world. With REDD+, the Golden State now has another golden opportunity to expand its global environmental leadership even further.

The REDD+ Offsets Working Group (ROW) convened by California, the Brazilian state of Acre, and the Mexican state of Chiapas, has released recommendations for how California can bring REDD+ into its carbon market.  The ROW, in accordance with California’s Global Warming Solutions Act’s (AB32) guidance, recommends that California allow states or countries that reduce their total emissions from deforestation below an historical average, while maintaining or increasing the output of commodities like cattle and soy that drive deforestation, to generate compliance credit in California.

This “jurisdictional” approach is much like what California is doing – reducing state-wide emissions below a clearly measurable historical level.

The ROW also recommends requiring states to show that they have made their own efforts to reduce deforestation, beyond any reductions that they seek credit for and ensuring that local –particularly indigenous — communities participate in policy design, have a choice about whether or not to participate in programs, and benefit directly if they do.

Tropical states such as Acre and Chiapas that are moving forward on their own to reduce deforestation know that California’s market for international offsets is very limited, and don’t expect to get paid for most of the reductions they’ve made or can make.

But they need a signal, and California’s carbon market may now hold the key to the future of the forest.

Until recently, rampant deforestation in the Amazon was a big part of the global warming problem – and a disaster for the millions of species of plants and animals and thousands of indigenous groups that live in the forests.  But when Brazil and Amazon states adopted new policies in 2005, all that began to change.

They ramped up law enforcement and started making large-scale reductions in Amazon deforestation, reducing their deforestation about 76% below the 1996 – 2005 average by 2012 (about 2.2 billion tons CO2) while increasing agricultural production and cattle herd. This came very close to the national target Brazil adopted — 80% reduction by 2020 — making it the world leader in emissions reductions.

Despite that progress – or maybe because of it – the Agriculture Caucus of the Brazilian Congress recently pushed for and won legislation weakening forest protection laws. The result? Although 2012 recorded the lowest deforestation on record, reports now say deforestation in the last five months has actually gone up in relation to 2011.

Creating demand for real, verifiable, additional REDD+ from jurisdictions that have solid social and environmental safeguards could be the sign the Amazon – and tropical jurisdictions around the world – need to know that REDD+ is real. Bringing it into California’s carbon market is an effective path to making that happen.

This blog is also cross-posted on the EDF Talks Global Climate Blog