California’s Climate Plan Snowball Starts Its Roll

There is a lengthy list of other measures with smaller impacts, and a large (35.2 million tonne) catch-all of “additional reduction from capped sectors”, most of which is likely to come from a cap-and-trade program. Of considerable significance, the Draft Scoping Plan emphasizes the Western Climate Initiative’s regional approach to cap-and-trade. Breathing life into this envisioned market of other Western states and Canadian provinces will require a major investment of political capital, but could stand as Arnold Schwarzenegger’s signature legacy — especially if climate legislation in the next Congress proves difficult to enact.

And the Draft Scoping Plan adroitly throws back into the California Legislature’s lap the market-versus-regulation divide that has framed much of the dialogue between Schwarzenegger and some Democratic leaders. By only relying on cap-and-trade for roughly one-fifth of total emission reductions, the document in effect challenges the Legislature to make some hard choices (e.g., a mandatory retrofit at time of sale) or expect a larger role for cap-and-trade. The starkest example is the expansion of the Renewable Portfolio Standard to 33% — a proposal which has been bottled up in a legislative committee by utility lobbyists for over a year. If the Legislature cannot muster the gumption to enact an initiative in the subject area most popular with the public, renewable energy, the ideological critique of Schwarzenegger’s reliance on market instruments will seem pretty hollow.

The Draft Scoping Plan is not without its deficiencies — it completely abstains from choosing between auctions and give-aways for the emission allocations a cap-and-trade system would employ. It also takes a characteristically state-centric approach to relations with local governments — patronizing advice on improved land use planning, vague talk of regional emission reduction targets, traditional hoarding of carbon fee revenues to pay for state (but not local) administration of the program. The political value of enlisting the states as meaningful partners in innovation dawned too late on the floor managers of the doomed Warner Lieberman bill. The same hubris seems present in Sacramento.

But Green Energy Warriors will find plenty in the Draft Scoping Plan to cheer. The soaring but ambiguous speeches about the scope of change required by 2050 is past. The abstract debate over political philosophies will dissipate. The focus now is on the nuts and bolts, calibrated against an easily measured target in a fairly near-term 2020. An important milestone has been achieved.

John Geesman recently completed his term on the California Energy Commission and has been following California politics for over 40 years. He writes “California Green Energy War: A former California Energy Commissioner digests global climate and energy politics” where this article originally appeared and it is republished with his permission. Geesman says of his site: “The Green Energy War is no stranger to passion, but is subject to periodic mind-clearing blasts of rationality as well. Won't you join me on patrol of this frontier as global society works through the greatest struggle of the 21st Century?”