California air quality regulators have tightened carbon standards in an attempt to further cut emissions from fuels in the state’s transportation system.
Several members of the California Air Resources Board, a powerful body that can influence global policies, called the rule changes a critical step on climate amid an expected rollback of federal environmental efforts under President-elect Donald J. Trump.
But the complex regulations, which were approved at the end of a marathon meeting on Friday, have spurred political fights this year between various groups. State lawmakers from both parties have criticized the changes for their potential to hike California’s gas prices, which are already among the highest in the nation.
The new restrictions have also triggered a dispute among environmental groups, researchers and industry officials over whether the California program disproportionately benefits the biofuels sector.
Here’s what to know about the changes.
How is the California program changing?
California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard is a statewide, market-based program that requires significant cuts in the carbon emissions produced by transportation fuels. This includes the emissions associated with their production, conveyance and use by consumers. The transportation sector on the whole accounts for about half of the state’s greenhouse gas emissions.
To comply, fuel producers must either reduce emissions in their own operations or buy credits from companies that sell fuels considered to be low in carbon. Such fuels include electricity for electric vehicles and renewable diesel, a biofuel that is chemically equivalent to petroleum diesel but derived from renewable biological sources such as plant oils and animal fats.
Fuel producers were previously required, by 2030, to cut carbon emissions over their fuel’s life cycle 20 percent below 2010 levels. In a 12-2 vote at the end of a 12-hour meeting, the regulators tightened these standards, raising the 2030 target to 30 percent and adding a 2045 target of a 90 percent reduction.
“It’s improving on what has been an incredibly successful program,” said Liane Randolph, the board chairwoman.
The updates also included additional funding for zero-emission vehicle charging and new sustainability requirements for renewable fuels.
Will these changes increase gas prices in California?
A key point of tension is the concern that the changes could significantly raise gas prices. Oil companies already pass about 8 to 10 cents per gallon onto consumers as a result of the Low Carbon Fuel Standard program, according to the agency.
Last September, the agency estimated that an earlier version of the proposal could have hiked gas prices by 47 cents per gallon starting next year and could have potentially added $1.80 per gallon by 2040. However, officials have said that the estimates did not take into account many important factors that affect gas prices and also did not reflect the changes that ultimately passed.
“We have a lot of data and analysis that we have published that makes it very clear that it is difficult, if not impossible, to calculate exactly how a program like this affects retail gas prices,” Ms. Randolph said.
Ms. Randolph added that the program would create competition in the transportation sector, which would give consumers more choice about the fuels they want to spend money on. It would also keep transportation costs lower overall for consumers, she said.
Danny Cullenward, a climate economist with the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy at the University of Pennsylvania, released an analysis of the amendments that found that they could increase gas prices by as much as $0.85 per gallon by 2030 and nearly $1.50 per gallon by 2035. Mr. Cullenward said he wrote the report as an independent academic project; he is also a member of a state advisory committee that prohibits him from having financial conflicts of interest with companies that participate in California’s carbon market.
“We are talking about a program that is politically radioactive,” he said.
Mr. Cullenward added that the agency’s decision not to release an estimate of gas price impacts before the final vote last week could reduce trust in state regulators and hinder California’s ability to approve further climate-related changes in the future.
Members on both sides of the aisle in California’s state assembly have warned that higher gas prices could hurt their constituents. Nearly 13,000 residents signed a petition led by Republicans in the State Senate that urged regulators to postpone the vote on the amendments.
State Sen. Melissa Hurtado, a moderate Democrat, said that many of her constituents in the Central Valley were lower-income and relied heavily on their vehicles for transportation.
“At a time when people are already struggling to make ends meet, this is a slap in the face,” Ms. Hurtado said.
The Western States Petroleum Association has also warned that the changes could increase costs. “At the end of the day, the consumers will be the ones who are impacted most,” said Jodie Muller, the group’s chief operating officer.
How will this affect California’s climate goals?
The California Air Resources Board estimates that the program has eliminated 320 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions from gasoline and diesel since it began in 2011, an amount equivalent to roughly 85 percent of the state’s annual greenhouse gas emissions.
The agency is projecting that its tighter restrictions will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 558 million metric tons between 2025 and 2045 — equivalent to about one and a half times the state’s annual emissions.
Ethan Elkind, director of the climate program at the Center for Law, Energy and the Environment at the University of California, Berkeley, said the changes would “absolutely” make a significant dent in reducing transportation emissions by nudging people away from gasoline and providing incentives to move toward all-electric alternatives.
California also has tried to reduce fossil-fuel use through consumer product restrictions. The state this year banned the sale of new gas-powered lawn mowers and blowers. The state also has required that all new cars sold produce zero emissions starting in 2035, a policy that was championed by Gov. Gavin Newsom.
Why are some environmentalists opposed to the changes?
Some researchers and environmental groups have raised concerns about the program’s focus on biofuels.
Some climate scientists have said that the program does not adequately take into account all of the emissions associated with the production of biofuels, such as underestimating those from deforestation in other parts of the world that supports agriculture used to make them.
Adrian Martinez, a deputy managing attorney for Earthjustice, an environmental law organization, said that the program had been a “biofuel boondoggle” in which a majority of the program’s financial incentives had gone toward biofuels instead of electrification.
“We’re not asking for perfection,” he said. “There was plenty of opportunity to do more, and they didn’t take it.”
Ms. Randolph said that the board had directed staff in 2025 to further review the climate impact of biofuels to better understand if there were any changes that would be necessary.
What comes next?
With the board’s approval, the changes will now be reviewed by the state’s Office of Administrative Law. The board expects the changes to take effect in the spring of 2025, according to Ms. Randolph.
Since the Low Carbon Fuel Standard is a California state program, the federal government has no authority over the changes, Ms. Randolph said.
Dean Florez, a former State Senate majority leader and one of two board members who voted against the changes, wrote in a statement that the public beforehand had “little opportunity for recourse or input.”
The leader of the State Senate, Mike McGuire, seemed to suggest in a statement that the Legislature could still intervene.
“Any new regulations must be open and transparent, which is why we’re analyzing their actions and will do so in earnest come January when the Legislature convenes,” he said.
The post How California’s New Fuel Standards Could Affect Drivers appeared first on New York Times.
