Climate 411

Despite threat of repeal, Washington state’s carbon market continues to raise urgently-needed revenue for communities in The Evergreen State

Photo of Mount Rainer

Results were released today for Washington’s second quarterly auction of 2024, administered last Wednesday by the Department of Ecology (Ecology). During the auction, participating entities submitted their bids for allowances. Under the Climate Commitment Act, Washington’s major emitters are required to hold one allowance for every ton of greenhouse gas that they emit, with the total number of allowances available declining each year. This requires polluters in Washington to reduce their emissions in line with the state’s climate targets. By distributing allowances via auction, the state can both regulate emissions and raise important revenue to invest in frontline communities, accelerate clean job creation, and more.

Here are the results, released today:

Read More »

Also posted in Cities and states, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, News, Policy / Comments are closed

California’s second carbon market auction of the year raises revenue at critical time for climate funds

This blog was co-authored by Sara Olsen, Project Manager, California Political Affairs

Results of the latest Western Climate Initiative auction were released today, showing continued demand for allowances and confidence in the long-term stability of this landmark program. This auction is expected to generate roughly $1.1 billion for the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), which is dedicated to funding initiatives aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions and building climate resilience.

A new report from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) finds that, in the past 10 years, climate investments like GGRF have reduced California’s emissions by 109.2 million metric tons — the equivalent to taking 80% of the state’s gas cars off the road — by investing in projects like adding zero-emissions transport options, building affordable housing near job centers and more. As California heads into another summer with an increased risk for wildfire and more impacts of climate change are becoming increasingly severe and evident, the importance of this fund is clearer than ever.

May auction results

  • All 51,589,488 current vintage allowances offered for sale were purchased, resulting in the 15th consecutive sold out auction. This is 0.72% or 373,000 more allowances than were offered at the previous auction.
  • The current auction settled at a price of $37.02, $12.98 above the $24.04 price floor and $4.74 below the February 2024 settlement price of $41.76.
  • All of the 7,211,000 future vintage allowances offered for sale were purchased — these allowances can be used for compliance beginning in 2027. This is the same number of future vintage allowances that were offered at the previous advance auction.
  • Future vintage allowances settled at $38.35, $14.31 above the $24.04 floor price and $2.65 below the February settlement price of $41.00.

What factors may be at play with these results?

A number of factors could be at play with today’s results which saw a lower settlement price than California’s most recent auction. The first is general market variability; potential program changes, such as those being considered by CARB, can drive uncertainty among market participants that results in price fluctuations. While prices in the WCI auctions tend to tick upwards, it’s not uncommon for prices to drop once in a while. This happened most recently in the August and November auctions in 2022, where prices dropped from the May 2022 price of $30.85 down to $27, and then down to $26.80 before starting to trend upward again. Last auction’s settlement price of $41.76 was a record price by $3.03, so today’s price puts the WCI market more on trend with where prices were in November and August of last year. Despite slightly lower prices this quarter, there’s still strong demand overall; the auction was completely sold out. The market continues to be stable, and some price fluctuations are to be expected, especially during periods of program adjustment.

Where is the revenue getting invested?

Over the past ten years, California delivered $11 billion from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) to more than half a million projects that cut pollution and mitigate the impacts of climate change. These investments yield meaningful environmental and community benefits, including a 109 million metric ton reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, 1,248 new or expanded transit projects, 29,800 new jobs, and 12,606 affordable housing projects under contract.

The $1.1 billion in revenue for GGRF from this auction comes at a critical moment, as California grapples with a $27.6 billion budget deficit. As the Governor and policymakers explore budget strategies, climate initiatives face the looming threat of funding cuts. In January, Governor Newsom proposed more than $3.1 billion in cuts and more than $5 billion in delays for climate funding. In the May Revision of his 2023-24 Budget Proposal, Governor Newsom proposed over $3 billion in additional cuts to significant climate investments. The proposal also reallocated funding for various climate programs to GGRF, relying on this source to alleviate the effects of the budget deficit.

Cap-and-trade, through emissions reductions and revenue generation, will be pivotal in addressing California’s current budget and climate challenges. The State’s reliance on the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund as a lifeline for essential climate initiatives only further underscores the need for these funds to be allocated strategically and exclusively towards climate and environmental justice priorities.

Also posted in California, Cities and states, Economics, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Policy / Comments are closed

Strong scientific foundations, as well as strong science-based markets, make successful nature-based climate solutions possible

Forester examines trees

Daniel Balakov, iStock

This post is authored by Brian Buma, Senior Climate Scienist, Environmental Defense Fund.

Nature is vital to our success in fighting climate change and its real-world impacts. To unlock nature’s climate potential, we need investments to go to impactful nature-based climate solutions (NbCS), which refer to strategies to conserve, restore or improve the management of natural and working ecosystems for their climate benefits.

However, in a research paper recently published by myself and others, we found markets for NbCS were getting ahead of the science. In particular, we found many NbCS where carbon crediting was proposed or implemented had questionable scientific foundations.

We need NbCS to work, and we’re spending tens of millions in the hopes they do. Yet as our study shows, questions remain on how we can achieve the best ground-level outcomes and maximize the enormous potential of these solutions to lower greenhouse gas concentrations.

To illustrate how NbCS can work successfully, we need to look at science and implementation and understand how these two key components are different, but also interconnected.

Let’s start by thinking about your car.

Read More »

Also posted in Forest protection, Science / Comments are closed

Governor Inslee moves Washington state one step closer to linking carbon market with California and Quebec

Today, the state of Washington took a big step toward linking its cap-and-invest program with the carbon markets in California and Quebec, a move that could boost climate action and create a more stable, more predictable market for all. Governor Inslee signed E2SB 6058 into law, which will further align Washington’s program with the joint California-Quebec program (known as the Western Climate Initiative) and facilitate a smoother linkage process.

This latest development builds on the momentum of last week’s joint statement from the three jurisdictions, in which they expressed their shared interest in the potential creation of a larger, linked market among them. While Governor Inslee and Washington policymakers are tackling climate change head-on and trying to strengthen the state’s carbon market, a wealthy hedge fund executive is trying to bring climate progress to a screeching halt through a ballot initiative that would end the program altogether. The contrast between the two outcomes for Washington’s cap-and-invest program could not be starker.

Here’s what you need to know about the linkage bill and what’s at stake with Washington’s program.

Read More »

Also posted in Cities and states, Economics, Energy, News, Policy / Comments are closed

How to act fast and smart (and where to move more cautiously) on nature-based climate solutions

Aerial photo of the Ecuadorian Amazon

Aerial photo of the Ecuadorian Amazon. Leslie Von Pless/EDF

This post is authored by Mark Moroge, Vice President of Natural Climate Solutions at Environmental Defense Fund.

We know that nature-based climate solutions are among our greatest assets when it comes to tackling climate change. Conserving, restoring and improving the management of nature – alongside reductions in new fossil fuel use – can provide at least 20% of the cost-effective climate mitigation needed between now and 2030 to stabilize warming to below 2 °C.

We also know that we need much greater investment in nature to achieve its climate change mitigation potential: the world must close a $4.1 trillion financing gap in nature by 2050 to achieve climate goals.

But with a wide variety of potential solutions on offer, and with carbon markets for financing these solutions under intense scrutiny, it is essential that credit purchases prioritize those solutions that have strong scientific backing. Otherwise, we risk undermining trust in the potential of these markets to deliver climate results.

That’s why a new scientific paper published this week in Nature Climate Change is so important. Here we explain the findings and provide two key lessons for advancing nature-based climate solutions.

Scientific confidence in different solutions varies

The study, carried out by 27 experts from 11 institutions, including the Environmental Defense Fund, The Nature Conservancy and Columbia University, brings a deep scientific assessment of 43 nature-based climate solutions that have been implemented or proposed for use in carbon markets.

Through an extensive literature review and expert elicitation process, it found a wide range in scientific confidence across, and within, the different solutions.

Read More »

Also posted in Forest protection, Science / Comments are closed

Resolving scientific uncertainties in nature-based climate solutions: Location, location, location

Drone shot of mangrove trees off the coast of the Yucatán Peninsula in Mexico.

Drone shot of mangrove trees off the coast of the Yucatán Peninsula in Mexico. Carlos Aguilera / EDF Mexico

The world needs nature-based climate solutions (NbCS). These approaches use conservation, restoration, and management of natural and agricultural systems to retain existing, and sequester additional, carbon while reducing emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases. NbCS have been suggested to meet 20-30% of the world’s climate goals. Correspondingly, nature-based actions are included in the national commitments of 63% (104 of 168) of the signatories of the Paris Agreement.

However, defining the climate impact of different solutions requires accurate scientific measurement and accounting of greenhouse gas mitigation, including how long that benefit lasts. Where we lack accurate measurements and estimates of future durability, we cannot yet rely on NbCS to meet our climate goals.

Assessment of the science on NbCS
Environmental Defense Fund recently worked with experts in academia and other conservation and research institutions to assess the scientific confidence in more than 40 NbCS that have been proposed. The results of that inquiry are both optimistic and sobering.

The four most frequently credited NbCS by the four major carbon credit registries have high scientific confidence – tropical and temperate forest avoided conversion or degradation and reforestation. The confidence of the scientific community in those NbCS supports investing in these as climate solutions and demonstrates that we can develop sufficient understanding of process, measurement, and accounting methods necessary to meet high quality crediting requirements.

However, the experts concluded that 90% (39/42) of the proposed NbCS assessed in the study currently have insufficient scientific evidence for having climate impact we can count on. Within that 90% are NbCS like avoided conversion and degradation of systems as different as mangroves and boreal forests (see below for why).

Promisingly, the experts do have confidence that we can remedy this situation: focused research over the next five years could resolve many of the remaining questions for two-thirds of those pathways. Given that some, like agroforestry, tropical peatland conservation, and biochar additions are also estimated to have large-scale climate impacts, this study provides a roadmap for prioritizing research efforts.

The importance of location
Every NbCS is different, and so are the specific uncertainties and research needs. Prediction of how natural systems may change as the climate changes – affecting their carbon storage and greenhouse gas emissions – is inherently uncertain. We are better at modeling some systems (like tropical forests) than others (like seagrass beds). But all NbCS pathways have something in common – location matters.

Read More »

Also posted in Basic Science of Global Warming, Forest protection, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, News, Oceans, Plants & Animals, Science / Comments are closed